#primary framing solution

[vedanshiindustries-blog]

Who is the Largest cold storage Building Manufacturers company in India?

  Cold Storage Building Manufacturers Steel Structures, Industrial Roofing Sheds, and MS Portable Cabins are some of the things that VEDANSHI INDUSTRIES manufactures. Cold Storage Building Manufacturers Additionally, VEDANSHI INDUSTRIES offers steel fabrication services of the highest caliber.

Secondary Members/Cold Formed Members Cold Storage Building Manufacturers Roof and wall panel Manufacturers C Purlin Suppliers Z Purlin Suppliers Warehouse Manufacturers Multi Storey Steel Building Manufacturers Z Purlin Manufacturers Roofing Sheet Manufacturers

Website – https://www.cpurlin.in/

[inthelittlewood]

So, just out of curiosity, are you thinking of making episodes for rats 2 like you did for all the other pow creations smps? If not, that's okay (:

I'm really not sure currently. For full transparency, the previous episodes of both series made on average about £40 individually. The occasional one flicked up to NEARLY £100, but they're real anomalies. Thumbnail costs take up a good portion of that 40, then what's left, divided by the hours it takes to condense masses of content down to episode form would be a wage grossly below minimum wage. It's not smart financially or motivationally to proceed that way.

I've always been proud of the end products of each episode / series but I had revenue coming from other sources that have since dried up. I can't make purely artistic decisions when I have mouths to feed and a home to maintain.

I've been quiet on video content this year because I've not had an SMP play in, so streaming became a primary earner. Even that was propped up significantly by our Logitech/Streamlabs sponsorship - which concluded unexpectedly early at the end of September due to budget adjustments on their end (zero bad feelings regarding that btw, it was all done fairly and by the contract, it was quarterly renewals and I was communicated respectfully with)

I'm lucky that Wild Life has come along when it has, as it gives me a little breathing room to try and secure a new sponsor or at least compile a content plan for late 2024 / early 2025.

Even my Life series barely pass the threshold to where an editor wouldn't gobble up the majority of the revenue. That one is a real 50/50 between coming out net neutral, or coming out with a minimal profit. It's rough. Speaking honestly, I'm a tad nervous about the immediate future, but I promise this isn't a post trying to rouse pity or spur on donations/subs etc, it's just transparency as I've always operated. It feels better laying it out so analytically because it gives people context and answers the FAQ of "why don't you just hire someone", the overhead isn't there.

I'm going to start putting the feelers out to try and secure a new partnership, I have one conversation pending and if we can I'll nab some sponsored streams more often to raise the tides.

That said, we are headed in to the best time of year for ad revenue on YouTube especially, but it's not quite the 5x multiplier I would need to sensibly navigate my situation ha

The only viable solution currently would be to crowd source funds to cover the costs of the work for making the episodes, whether that be paid to me and I edit them myself or more ideally, an editor, so I can focus my efforts in to producing another piece of content. I've no idea what the Patreon/Kofi/Crowdfunding landscape is like currently both mechanically and socially. Are they a thing people subscribe to anymore? They inherently come with more pressures too which I'm nervous to take on.

I'm likely to get inbox messages offering to edit for free or at a reduced fee, but PLEASE DON'T DO THAT. Even if you're framing it as good practice, or a portfolio/client list piece, I wouldn't feel comfortable with that. It's a very sweet gesture and I totally understand showing that initiative / sincerity, I've been there, but those scenarios can too often be miscommunicated or misconstrued and it gets messy. People's time and talents deserve compensation.

So tl;dr answer is I'm not sure, I might try an episode 1 to see how it performs, but it's not looking great. Sorry.

[anarchywoofwoof]

What's New Experts are warning of a looming increase in grocery prices as agricultural soil becomes increasingly unproductive. In a concerning trend that could impact households across the globe, the combination of overfarming, climate change and insufficient sustainable practices has left vast swaths of farmland degraded and unproductive, threatening food supply chains and driving up costs. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that 33 percent of the Earth's soils are already degraded and more than 90 percent could become degraded by 2050. Why It Matters According to the FAO, soil erosion "occurs naturally under all climatic conditions and on all continents, but it is significantly increased and accelerated by unsustainable human activities (up to 1,000 times) through intensive agriculture, deforestation, overgrazing and improper land use changes. "Soil erosion rates are much higher than soil formation rates," the FAO said. "Soil is a finite resource, meaning its loss and degradation is not recoverable within a human lifespan." A map previously published by Newsweek predicts that 95 percent of America's soil will be degraded in less than 30 years. Only a 5 percent area is marked not degraded.

i absolutely love (/s) how this story is being framed as further price inflation and economic woes being the primary thing to worry about. the worst part of barren food stores isn't related to high prices.

the soil of our earth, our home planet, is dying/being killed by industrial agriculture, and as such we are now struggling to produce food. what this describes is imminent global famine within most of our lifetimes (~30yrs). sticker shock is not the biggest threat. that award goes to malnutrition and starvation.

it's possible to recover from this. but the solutions involved cost money and also winds up reducing overall crop yield, so many farmers aren’t going to pursue these solutions as frequently because they just aren’t feasible. the biggest concern for the average farmer is economic viability. point blank.

thus, any efforts at taking even baby steps to solve this problem will require centralized governments, particularly in the west, to enact direct, formative changes. unfortunately, all of them happen to be collapsing at this very moment. so... hang on tight, i suppose.

[siriuslyobsessedwithfiction]

How Shadow and Bone trilogy should've ended

The most popular solution in fantasy genre to an evil monarch seems to be replacing them with a less evil monarch and having trust that they will make things right. We accept this easily since the story is usually set in medieval times and the idea of forming a government seems unrealistic given the setting. But Leigh Bardugo lost the right to use that excuse when she decided to set Grishaverse in late nineteenth century/early twentieth century.

The setting

Leigh Bardugo was inspired by imperial Russia and decided to make it more edgy, giving it the nickname "tsarpunk" (God give me strength). The time period or the year is never mentioned in Grishaverse, but since it's closely based on the real world, I'll draw conclusions from the text. She might've specified in interviews, but most people never read all the declarations an author makes, so she should've made things more clear in the books. The world-building is frankly, rather flimsy, even for YA.

Most fans seem to think the story takes place in 17th/18th century. It does not. Even though the technological advancements can't be measured the same as in the real world since the Grisha are primary reason for it, cars and tanks already exist in Grishaverse. Even this doesn't make any sense because according to the text, Fjerdans invented tanks first, cars second and submarines third. In reality, the order of the events is the opposite: submarines (1620), cars (1886), tanks (1915).

The events in Shadow and Bone trilogy seem to be very loosely based on the death of Czar Alexander the third (1894), reign of Czar Nicholas the second (1896-1917), Rasputin's murder (1916) and the February revolution (1917) which ended monarchy in Russia.

2. The fictional world setting

Besides barely mentioned Wandering Isle and saints-know-whose Southern Colonies, we have Fjerda and Shu-Han with absolute monarchies, and then we have Kerch and Novyi Zem, which are framed as more "progressive" countries by the narrative. We don't know much about Novyi Zem, except that it's a newly established country with growing economy and doesn't have monarchy. Kerch is ruled by the merchant council (*cough* oligarchs *cough*) - also doesn't have monarchy. So why is it such an outlandish idea for Ravka to abolish absolute monarchy? It isn't.

3. The monarchy is only as good as the monarch

Monarchy had been causing more damage to Ravka than the Fold. Incompetent Kings waged and lost countless wars, emptied royal coffers and made a significant amount of soldiers desert the first army. Regular people lived in poverty, lack of education made them prejudiced and easily controlled, and no effort whatsoever had been made to integrate Grisha in regular people's lives. The Kings preferred them bunched up in one place in the Little Palace to better keep an eye on them (it's canon, the little palace was patrolled) or on the front lines.

"I’ve always cared about good work. Polnya’s had a line of good kings. They’ve served their people, built libraries and roads, raised up the University, and been good enough at war to keep their enemies from overrunning them and smashing everything. They’ve been worthy tools. I might leave, if they grew wicked and bad."

-Uprooted, Naomi Novik.

Ravkan Kings haven't been doing any of those things. But it's okay to keep the outdated tradition that does more harm than good because Nikolai is charming and better than his rapist father(who he gave a nice retirement and more servants to rape, btw)? What about his descendants?

Since it's always been that way, it should continue to be that way? Why is the change in status quo perceived as something bad?

"- Who invented this vehicle? The Frenchman asked between laughs, pointing to the postcart on which the sleepy "yamshtchik" was stupidly nodding. - The Russians, I answered. - I imagine nobody is likely to dispute the honour with them. I pity you to be forced to addle your brain and shake up your stomach on a thing like that.

- What's to be done? If the whole of Russia travels in this manner, why should I complain?

-That's why Russia doesn't advance more rapidly. God give you a safe journey. As for me, I tell you frankly I would not risk my life by getting into it."

-Ilia Chavchavadze, Notes of a Journey from Vladikavkaz to Tiflis.

4. Abolishing the monarchy would actually solve problems

If Nikolai really wanted what's best for Ravka, instead of putting himself and then an impulsive living nuke with anger issues on the throne, he would create a parliament, a council of sorts, where he would still be the head figure as the King, since the nation wouldn't immediately take the change well , and the members would be the Triumvirate and the nobles he trusted, like Count Karigan. Over the years, the flow of power would pass more to the council, and eventually the monarchy would be abolished and Nikolai's children wouldn't take the throne. Regular people would be given an opportunity to have an education and later, the otkazatsya part of council wouldn't consist of just nobleborns. A part of the council would always have to consist of Grisha, which would bridge the division between them and otkazatsya.

But no, who wants progress and democracy when we can have a cool slay queen dragon (an emotionally unstable vessel for an ancient being).

[spacelazarwolf]

Saying that you come off as a zionist 'because of the way you frame Jews and Israelis' is kind of creepy when the primary thing you've been saying throughout is that violence against them by a terrorist group is bad. Saying Jewish lives are important and that Israelis don't deserve to die just for existing in Israel is zionism now apparently.

it’s bc she’s using “zionist” as a dogwhistle for “jew i don’t like” and “zionism” as a dogwhistle for “opinion about israel palestine that i don’t agree with.” which is unfortunately what’s happening with most discourse.

and the problem is, if you don’t know what the fuck zionism is, you cannot be antizionist. you cannot be anti something you do not understand. that’s why so much antizionism falls into antisemitism, because so much antisemitism relies on ignorance. if you truly want to be an antizionist, that requires doing your due diligence, reading zionist literature and educating yourself on the ideology and history, or at least just educating yourself on the basics using sources that aren’t just social media. to be an effective antizionist, you need to understand exactly what it is you’re opposing and why you oppose it.

i don’t personally identify myself as an antizionist for reasons i’d rather not go into, but i’ll give an example i’ve talked about before. political zionism is the desire for a jewish state governed by jewish people, sometimes with the added assumption of the state being under jewish law. i oppose this because 1. i don’t believe in the concept of states, 2. there are other people who live in the area besides jews who need political representation, and 3. jewish law only applies to jews, so trying to have a state that functions under jewish law essentially makes it a theocracy which i oppose.

the same applies to a lot of the buzzwords often used in this conversation: colonialism, ethnic cleansing, genocide, apartheid.

what makes what israel is doing colonialism? how is that complicated by the fact it was preceded, if not directly caused by, british colonialism? how is it further complicated by the fact the jewish people originated in that area and that there are populations of jews who have been there for centuries? do you know what the settlements are and what makes them a problem?

what makes what israel is doing ethnic cleansing? what do you know about the nakba? how much do you know about israel’s practice of denying permits and demolishing palestinian homes? how does the dramatic decrease in the number of palestinians allowed to work in israel contribute to this?

do you know what genocide means? do you know how it is different and similar to ethnic cleansing? are you familiar with the history or displays of palestinian identity being illegal in israel? are you aware of how palestinians living in israel are legally identified and how that affects their connection to palestinian peoplehood? despite the fact israel does not control gaza, hamas does, what tactics is israel using to worsen the conditions there?

can you define apartheid? can you describe the policies instituted by the israeli government that fall under the definition of apartheid?

and most importantly, can you find all the answers to these questions somewhere besides social media?

you cannot just use these words because you saw others using them. you have to know exactly what they mean and exactly how they apply to what palestinians are experiencing, otherwise your antizionism and your activism are worthless.

if you want to be an effective activist, you MUST be able to answer these questions, because if you can’t even describe the problem you will be a hindrance to the solution.

[o-wild-west-wind]

okay, here’s my actual thoughtful post: I get why people are upset about the finale…I really do. but I want to mention that there’s a bigger picture to this story that’s missing if you’re zooming too close onto Izzy as a character, and I’m honestly so grateful that the show stuck to the thematic arc it introduced in season 1 because, as per usual, it’s about the themes 🤌 and this show never skimps on the symbolism!!

so here’s the thing: the primary themes are toxic masculinity (& it’s opposite, queer joy); trauma; love as a healing force for the above; and, title alert—DEATH. because it’s so much more than a cool title!

now, Izzy has always represented something metaphorical about all of these points; most directly, he’s always represented masculinity, and s2 has been an arc of toxicity deconstruction. but crucially, he’s also represented all that for Ed, who is the deuteragonist of this show. because—don’t forget—Stede and Ed are the show.

I’ve always doubted myself for feeling this after seeing how fandom saw Izzy as a third romantic figure (which like by all means have a blast in your fanfics I don’t care it’s about joy at the end of the day and pursue that as you want to), but after hearing something about djenks referring to Izzy as a father figure, it confirms a major point for me—Izzy is also in a lot of ways a parallel to Ed’s dad, and a representation of the trauma and guilt Ed felt from that formative killing. for so long, Izzy was an aggressive shadow in Ed’s life, and a tangible reminder of those daddy issues—someone telling him what to do, keeping him Blackbeard—and the beautiful thing is how that changed this season, how Izzy became a version of masculinity that could love and be beautiful and make good from the hurt, the literal poison into positivity. someone antithetical to his own paternalistic force, healing our daddy issues one drag show at a time. BUT, Izzy is still thematically representative within Ed’s arc—and by also representing the trauma that made Ed “Blackbeard,” it does make smart writing sense as to why Izzy died (NOT saying you can’t be sad about it—stick with me for a moment).

because here’s the thing—as aforementioned, this show is also about DEATH. killing is the root of everyone’s trauma, and reconciling a relationship with death is the ultimate arc Ed and Stede are both on, with the ultimate path of learning to live despite its inevitability. there’s a reason it was such a huge thing that Ed couldn’t personally kill, and then in this episode killed so many people with his bare hands in the name of love—and there’s a reason that was framed as a good thing. and there’s also Ed’s (and arguably Stede’s) active suicidality, which has been a huge force driving this season. these are characters who see death as this all-consuming thing, and they see their own deaths as the only solution. death is the traumatic force driving almost everything about their being for so long—and its reconciliation is everything for them, the greatest sign of growth. so Izzy’s death, and everyone beginning again with love—healing each other with love—is a cap to it all. it’s death as a positive force, for once. it’s death as love, not trauma. it’s death as something that will always happen, but this time not forced by your own hand. it’s a death to everything toxic, to what “Blackbeard” represented, and all the while a sort of rebirth. it’s kind of a death to…death? it’s functionally like the real physical moon replacing the giant romantic imaginary orb: it’s taking the thing that’s been artificially morphed in Stede and Ed’s heads and making it real this time, with all the bittersweet emotions that come with tangible reality.

and honestly, I’m glad that it was tragic and emotional. I didn’t think I’d be so devastated to see Izzy die, but it really did get to me, especially because of everything he said to Ricky and then to Ed. but think of it this way: Izzy and Ed might be romantically compelling because they were toxic and charged (and I hope people still enjoy everything they get from that dynamic in fan work), but imagine if the show had actually gone in that direction—where would it take us thematically? it would kill the thesis; it would be love as chaos and entertainment, but not healing. instead, this show gave us something so much more powerful: a legitimate, fully-fleshed trauma arc.

trauma hurts. Izzy’s death hurts. but that’s okay. that’s great, actually! it means the storytelling was effective—that Izzy’s arc made you feel something. and i know this won’t be every viewer’s experience, but honestly? I’m glad I can have this grieving process in such a beautifully framed light in the safe space ship of this show, because let’s be real—death, real life death, fucks you up. and let me tell you, I could’ve used this show during so many episodes of grief in my life. but here it is now, reminding us that our grief and trauma doesn’t define us—and WHAT a powerful thing for queer love, especially, to be presented as the thing that heals us all. ESPECIALLY when so much grief and death in this community is woven so deeply with the trauma of our identity.

so grieve as you need to, but don’t forget to turn the poison into positivity 💛 because that’s what the show is telling us—choose live, despite!

[thyfleshc0nsumed]

Okay I need honesty, do I sound fucking insane. like do I sound crazy. like do I sound cookoo dumb stupid crazy ass who should delete this and stop wasting their time on this or like am I making some snse

‘The pedophile’ is a scapegoat and boogeyman. It is an individualist, carceral, and fascist framing of childhood and adolescent sexual abuse. The individualist nature of this widely-accepted phenomenon functions to provide cover to the material basis that allows and creates such abuse, and is beloved by fascists for its malleability and galvanizing effect. Individual and carceral solutions are fundamentally incapable of stopping sexual abuse; if we truly care about the issue, we must abandon these frameworks altogether.

What is ‘the pedophile’ as a framework?

‘The pedophile’ is an attempt to provide anatomy of the problem. In this view, the cause is simple: for whatever reason, there exist a number of intrinsically sick, or more likely, evil individuals who lust after children and adolescents and make it their life’s goal to rape and defile them. With this framework, the solution is just as simple–dispose of the problemed people. If something about them is incurably evil, then what else is there to be done?

I understand the appeal of this framing to the majority that buy into it; a few years ago, I was caught up in the fervor myself. It’s a fairy tale; there exists a possibility of a ‘happily ever after.’ Evil is singular, and discreet from the world around it. The question of ‘why did they do it’ is conveniently irrelevant and inexplicable–evil is evil because it is evil; we must only know that it is evil and we (who could never be evil) must expel it. 

Unfortunately, evil does not exist. But harm does, and harm is necessarily based in the material, not the moral, or spiritual, or metaphysical. Material results have material causes–that is to say, there are ‘whats,’ ‘whys,’ and ‘hows’ to every meaningful harm.

First, the ‘what’: What happened, and what detrimental material impact did it have?

Second, the ‘why’: Why might the person who did the harm have done so?

Third, the ‘how’: How was the harm made possible?

To view sexual abuse in terms of ‘bad people do bad things,’ we shut down the second question with the thought-terminating idea of evil, and entirely ignore the third question. By doing this, we fully close ourselves off from any ideas that could meaningfully deal with the issue outside of individual instances of it. If we don’t know how harm comes to pass, we are utterly powerless to stop its furtherance. 

Childhood sexual abuse, like all forms of abuse, is made possible through unequal relationships to power. To understand this, we must understand ‘the family,’ the role of children within it, and the way capitalist society uses the family as an economic unit.

What is ‘the family’?

‘The family’ is capitalist society’s primary organizational method through which individuals meet their material needs. No matter a society’s methods of distribution, it is labor that is the animating essence of survival. Food must be cooked, children must be raised, waste must be taken out, and in a capitalist society, labor power must be sold so that the rent gets paid and the cabinets stay stocked. 

Ignoring the production chains that produce the commodities that are foundational to our lives, it is exceedingly difficult to run a household single-handedly. If someone is not able to leave a situation because they would lack the financial means to subsist otherwise, the person providing those financial means holds power over them. This is a neutral

[atamascolily]

I keep seeing people saying variations on "Gosh, I can't wait to see Madoka fight Homura in Walpurgis no Kaiten!" and while far be it from me to rain on anybody's parade (the id wants what it wants), I can't help doing a double-take every time this comes up, because it's so dramatically different from my own viewing experience and perception of the characters.

Apart from the inherent assumption that violence is the only possible method of conflict resolution, you're telling me that Madoka Kaname, who wants all magical girls to be friends and team up together to fight witches, who repeatedly throws herself in between angry combatants who could break her like a twig, who tosses her best friend's soul off a bridge to break up a fight, who faces down a witch on the faint hope of getting said friend back, who sacrifices herself so magical girls don't have to suffer anymore, and whose reaction to finding that her best friend has become a big scary monster in Rebellion is to rush over and hold her hand--is going to fight Homura, of all people?!

Let's just say I'll believe it when I see it.

It's not that Madoka isn't capable of violence--she made that abundantly clear when she shot Mami at point-blank range to save Homura--but to say it's not her preferred solution is a vast understatement. Being forced to kill both Mami and Sayaka in quick succession devastates her--and if Homura hadn't been present, there was a very real chance of Madoka becoming a witch herself in that moment. When we do see Madoka fight, she tends to win in a single shot, as in later timelines against Walpurgisnacht. Maybe Devil!Homura is the only one strong enough to stand against her--but that assumes that Madoka would ever choose to fight her in the first place, no matter how angry/hurt/betrayed she feels, and no matter what Homura has done.

Madoka is not only the show's title character, she is its moral center, and the literal heart (there's even one on her magical girl outfit to drive the point home); the goddess she becomes, while still bearing death, is guided by compassion and mercy, not aggression and cruelty. Even if she were to fight Homura, it would be very much a "I'll kick your ass to bring you back to reality" kind of fight rather than one to kill.

Homua might well see herself as Madoka's enemy, but I don't think Madoka sees Homura as hers. Their conflict is real and deserves to finally be addressed, but ultimately it be can only be resolved by honest communication with each other. You know, that one thing Homura simultaneously craves and shies away from in equal measures, so it isn't like this is going to be easy! True emotional openness and vulnerability requires far more courage than blowing stuff up and always has.

It's tempting to see Homura and Madoka's reification as two opposite and opposing forces to be the primary conflict moving forward, but I think that will ultimately prove to be a false dichotomy. If the two are truly on the same level, the yin to the other's yang, neither can win against the other in the end; the only true ending involves them united as equals.

Instead, I see Homura vs. herself to be the ultimate conflict, with "self" taking a wide variety of externally manifesting forms thanks to previously established worldbuilding. The key visual for Walpurgis no Kaiten appears to support this premise, with Homura facing off against another Homura, while Madoka hovers in the background. It's not that I think Madoka isn't important, but the framing here certainly does not suggest that a violent struggle between her and Homua will be a large part of the plot.

And sure, trailers and promotional materials can be misleading--but like Kyubey, they generally do so by putting the truth in plain sight and trusting the audience to mislead themselves.

[lightofraye]

Hi!

Oooooh boy. It’s a barely touched upon topic, so I’ll do my best to answer.

Despite what its name suggests, reactive abuse is actually a form of self-defense that some people take in response to the ongoing abuse.

“Reactive abuse” describes a moment where the victim reacts aggressively towards their abuser. The abuser often manipulates this reaction to shift blame and creates a false narrative of so-called “mutual abuse”. However, this behavior is self-defense, a response to ongoing abuse, and should not be equated with abusive behavior.

Signs Of Reactive Abuse

It’s challenging to recognize when you or someone else is in an abusive relationship. There are three stages to demonstrate what an abusive relationship with reactive abuse can look like.

Antagonism

The abuser deliberately provokes their partner, pushing them to react in anger or frustration. It may not seem harmful initially, but eventually can cause a person to hit their breaking point. A few examples of behaviors that can trigger reactive abuse:

Asking a personal or triggering question, especially around others

Posting or commenting on your social media in an intentionally triggering way

Intentionally violating your emotional or physical boundaries

“Forgetting” to do something intentionally

Baiting you into arguments and then belittling your reaction 2. Proof

Once the partner reacts, the abuser quickly seizes the opportunity to use this reaction as “proof” that the victim is the abusive one. This can involve recording the outburst on video, taking photographs of any physical responses, or simply recounting the incident to friends, family, or authorities in a way that frames the abuser as the victim. By capturing these moments of reactive behavior, the abuser constructs a narrative that supports their version of events and shifts attention away from their abusive actions.

However, abuse is fundamentally about power and control. The abuser, who holds the most power in the relationship, will use their partner’s reaction to manipulate and control the narrative. 3. Turning the tables

Turning the tables is a tactic frequently employed in reactive abuse. Here, the abuser shifts the blame onto their partner, claiming that the relationship problems or conflicts are due to the partner’s aggressive behavior. This tactic is used to deflect responsibility and perpetuate the cycle of abuse. By making their victim seem the primary aggressor, the abuser not only avoids accountability, but also reinforces their control over the narrative of the relationship. This manipulation can leave the victim feeling isolated, misunderstood, and doubting their own experiences of abuse.

Is there a difference between reactive abuse and mutual abuse?

In a word—yes. You might have heard the term “mutually abusive” to describe a rocky or tumultuous relationship, but experts agree that the concept of mutual abuse does not exist.

Can two people in a relationship exhibit unhealthy behaviors? Yes. The abuse stems from one person’s desire for power and control over the other person. In an abusive relationship, the abuser will purposely behave in a cruel, violent, demeaning, or invasive manner toward their partner to create an imbalance of power.

The victim may eventually react to that abuse, but that response is considered to be self-defense. According to the National Domestic Violence Hotline, signs that your behavior is in self-defense include:

You acted when you felt that your safety was at risk

You acted in a way to try and re-establish your independence

You’d like to change your behavior because you know it’s not who you are or healthy for a relationship

There’s a lot more information about it in these links, but this is the essential information.

Understanding Reactive Abuse: Signs and Solutions

What is Reactive Abuse?

Reactive Abuse: What It is and Why Abusers Rely on It

[zeroar]

An Open Letter to the People Who Support Autism Speaks

Autism Speaks is eighteen years old. The age they should start dismissing themselves as being an authority on autism like they do with autistic adults if they cared about consistency at all.

They were founded in 2005 by a couple of Hollywood executives who grieved the diagnosis of their grandchild. This was a full dozen years after the seminal "Don't Mourn For Us" by Jim Sinclair was penned and presented.

From the beginning, Autism Speaks was anti-autism. They sought a "cure" they could use to erase our existence from the planet, they fomented anti-vax conspiracies which are still plaguing our society today, and they fostered and continue to foster an environment supportive and understanding of child-murder.

But. They were connected to celebrity. And they had the endowment and reach to become the largest anti-autism group in the nation and world.

The primary method of advertising which Autism Speaks used from the beginning is known as "fear appeal".

Typically, they frame autistic children as changeling-like creatures which replace the allistic or neurotypical child you had with one which will never love you and will tear apart your family.

Autism Speaks spotlights the worst of having an autistic family member and pulls the drapes on any mitigating circumstances or assistance. They emphasize the burden we are and the harm caused to our families by our existence.

Autism Speaks then goes on to frame themselves as being the solution and the experts on everything autism. They say, don't listen to autistic people, listen to their parents and other people who have been negatively affected by their existence. Listen to these cherry-picked examples.

They talk vaguely about support for autistic children and families while they campaign ceaselessly to find the genes which contributed to making us... so they can unmake us.

As you might expect for people who frame themselves as being the victim of their children's existences, they have been easily taken in by snake-oil salesmen and conspiracy theorists.

To this day, Autism Speaks continues to emphasize the "environmental causes of autism" even while fully knowing (from the millions of dollars of research they put in pursuing a debunked study) that autism appears to be primarily genetic and our environment really only affects our presentations as autistic, not our realities as autistic.

"Environmental causes" is a dog whistle for vaccines because they no longer feel it is profitable for them to explicitly encourage widespread death and alternative disabilities of children, so they have started only alluding to it and finally, years after the study was debunked and retracted, agree that vaccines do not cause autism.

"Environmental causes" is also a dog whistle for things like heavy metal poisoning causing autism and various other external things that can be "taken care of" via chelation therapy and bleaching our insides. Yes, Autism Speaks is at least partially responsible for spreading bleach "cures".

I believe they've taken it down since I first started advocating for SPLC to recognize Autism Speaks as a hate group—something autistic persons have recognized for years—but as recently as a year ago they were still directing people to seek out these "cures".

They worded it in such a way that it was, "These 'cures' do not work and can cause harm, but you should talk to people who tried them for their children and see for yourself."

It's cruelty for cruelty's sake. Or it's believing scientifically disproven things in a way that promotes the torture of children.

Which brings us to arguably their biggest crime against humanity and against autistic people specifically thus far: the advancement of behaviorism or behavioral conditioning as the "treatment" for autism.

Behaviorism, that is, conversion therapy torture. When done on autistic people, it is commonly called ABA or PBS.

This is another reason why they cling to "environmental causes", because behaviorism is entirely consumed with external presentation.

Autism is a pervasive neurological state which colors every aspect of our lives. Their "solution" is to deny our reality, break us to their will, and have us pretend to be "normal".

Through their efforts, they have ensured conversion therapy is not just used, but frequently the only choice for covered treatment of autistic children.

I say "choice", but the torture is sometimes court-mandated (and this is more common when the parents are marginalized-by-society in some way themselves).

Autism Speaks is so very proud of their government influence. Shortly before I started the petition, I watched in horror as their testimony scuttled a bill at the state level intended to help autistic children which had the support of their parents because not enough torture was included in the "help".

People say they've "changed", yet it's not like their institution is so hallowed and sacrosanct that it is necessary to keep around even as it is continues to encourage harm and death to autistic children and autistic adults.

Autism Speaks is the multi-headed hydra of anti-autism rhetoric and hate in the world today. They have so many branches and have infiltrated so deeply that many of their supporters ( I hope ) are not even aware of the hateful rhetoric and active harm they spread.

People tend not to even question the premise that autistic humans are better off dead than alive, people have for ages not even thought of us as human. Autism Speaks recommends starting behavioral conditioning as early as possible in children as young as two. The least intensive programs they recommend are for dozens of hours a week.

This is what they recommend, push, and lobby for with *all* autistic children.

If they become able to accurately recognize autism in a fetus, then their genocide and eugenics will only accelerate. I am pro-abortion, but no one should be coerced into an abortion with lies and one-sided propaganda.

Showing hateful rhetoric and catastrophizing about our existence to a newly pregnant person is similarly abominable as the sort of thing anti-choice people do.

Autism Speaks has not changed, though they have gotten better at pretending normality. Maybe they put themselves through conversion therapy torture to learn how to pretend to be a force of good while being sympathetic of child murderers?

Or, you know, they've hired publicists and PR people.

If you were duped by them, I'm sorry that their hate is not more well-known. Can you imagine if the first place you felt supported you and understood your struggles was the bad guy? Who would think that by default?

But they are the bad guy. And they're using you. Preying on your isolation and desire for community and support.

They start early. Constant public outreach. Working with cops. University chapters. There may even be entire branches under their umbrella that are actively dedicated to good. But they support the hate and harm by supporting Autism Speaks.

If you support Autism Speaks, then you support the elimination of autism.

If you believe their fear-driven propaganda designed to earn more money for themselves, that may sound like a good thing to you.

But you cannot eliminate autism without eliminating the autistic person, too.

We cannot turn off our autism, some of us can pretend normality—frequently to our great misfortune—but others can't do that either. It's similar to what happens when you force queer people through conversion therapy torture / behaviorism regimes.

There is not some hidden switch in our brains to "fix" us. Even if there was, we would not be ourselves, we would be different people. You cannot separate autism from the autistic.

If this letter spoke to you, I hope you will consider signing my petition to get the Southern Poverty Law Center to track anti-disability hate and to recognize Autism Speaks as an anti-autism group.

You can find the petition here:

Thank you for reading, Zero Richardson

[evidence-based-activism]

Hi, @not-yet-so-broken! I wanted to respond to your re-blog of my post since it raised some important points. Unfortunately, (and unsurprisingly since they clearly didn't have any counter-arguments) @genderkoolaid has me blocked, so I can't re-blog that post. As such, I'm responding to your points below:

I'm glad you agree with the basis of my re-blog! I think it's helpful to start with a similar frame of reference. In reference to the rest: I thought it was pretty clear that the op's intention with that post was to: imply female-on-female violence is as common as male-on-female, suggest that separatism is pointless, and criticize people for focusing on male-on-female violence prevention. It was from that lens that I responded to the post, which I think is the main reason why you interpreted my post as you did. I talk a little bit more about female-on-female violence in this post and this post.

To be very clear, my conclusion that men are the primary perpetrator of violence against women is not meant to imply that women's violence is more acceptable or excusable, only less common.

However, I do think that trying to make violence "gender neutral", as I believe the op of that post was attempting to do, causes significant harm. It sounds like you agree with this much? Since this was the frame of reference I started with, my goal in my re-blog was to show why we shouldn't do this, not to actually address solutions for female-on-female violence. This is why I didn't address the issue, not because it is "lesser and 'insignificant'".

---

However, I feel I should point out that there is no evidence that as a whole people are more likely to dismiss female violence than male violence. (I address this point a bit more in those two posts I linked to, which is also where most of the sources are, but I'll reiterate below.) In fact,

Victims appear to report violence by women and men at similar rates

When victims do not report the violence, they appear to have similar reasons for both male and female violence [1]

When convicted, women appear to have similar (or even more severe) punishments as men for equivalent (violent) crimes

There is very little research about public opinion on female vs male offenders, however the little there is suggests crimes (particularly violent crimes) are rated at least as bad/serious when committed by women as men [2]

In terms of same-sex couple violence specifically:

Data on the response from the legal system is frustratingly scare, and somewhat contradictory. For example, [3] indicates that there is little to no difference in prosecutor and police response to same-sex domestic violence when considering cases where the victim doesn't refuse to cooperate, but also indicates victims of same-sex violence (domestic and non-domestic) are more likely to refuse to corporate with law enforcement. Alternately, [4] indicates that same-sex domestic violence incidents are less likely to result in arrest and more likely to result in dual arrest than opposite-sex incidents, although this difference appears to be eliminated with increasing incident severity. A different study [5] found no difference in police perception of same-sex vs opposite sex domestic violence.

Public opinion research is essentially non-existent (or at least, very very difficult to find). I did find a study [6] that showed some differences in perceptions about same-sex domestic violence among crisis center staff, which is obviously important given their extremely significant role in the issue. However, there are some pretty significant concerns with generalizability, given that the sample was not random or representative. In addition, the results were somewhat mixed, in that they indicated statistically greater concern for opposite-sex incidents on some measures (consider situation more serious, consider it more likely the abuse will re-occur, etc.), greater concern for same-sex incidents on some measures (believe it's harder for a same-sex victim to leave, believe same-sex victims were more likely to be financially dependent), and no significant difference on 14 of the 21 measures (perpetrator/victim responsibility, counseling recommendation, etc.). As a side note: the scores also indicate there's a need for more education in the field in general, concerning both opposite- and same-sex abuse.

In my opinion, all of this suggests that the claim that female violence isn't taken as seriously as male violence is a myth, one that's been repeated so many times many people regard it as fact. This is relevant because it means that we can apply solutions to the broad problems of child abuse and domestic violence, rather than requiring separate solutions for male- vs female-offenders.

---

As indicated by the above, I hear the assertion that people are more likely to dismiss women's violence fairly often, but I have never received or found any evidence that this is the case. There are, however, several reasons why this may appear to be the case:

First, there are unfortunately still far too many people who are prepared to dismiss most/any sexual or domestic violence. These people would dismiss violence by both men and women, which appears to the victim as a dismissal of that specific form of violence. This dismissal can be countered by broader social messaging, most of which is about male violence (as it is more common). As a result, victims of female violence are more likely to feel dismissed by society at large. Notably, this is a excellent reason for why we need to address female-on-female violence without diluting the message by comparing or minimizing male violence.

Second, even among those who don't dismiss all/most sexual and domestic violence, there are many who will only recognize overtly violent behaviors. For example, there are some people who believe rape has to involve physical violence or threats of physical violence; they (incorrectly) do not recognize that rape can also be coerced through non-violent means including use of authority, drugs and alcohol, etc. This is relevant because research also shows that female offenders are much more likely than male offenders to use these sorts of "indirect" tactics. As a result, a greater proportion of female crime than male crime may not be taken seriously. However, this is a result of insufficient understanding and/or malicious dismissal of a type of crime not of female offenders specifically (i.e., a crime by a man using these sorts of tactics would be similarly dismissed by people with this view point). Obviously, this is a problem, but the solution to this is a campaign directed at increasing understanding/emphasis of these sorts of violence not one about female-offenders specifically.

Finally, this belief may be what people expect other people to believe, without necessarily believing it themselves. When enough people repeat this, it appears to the public as if it's a common belief without actually having much genuine support. This would suggest that this assertion is based on a widely held (MRA based) myth, more than any actual fact.

Importantly, the above points also mean that, regardless of the empirical findings, many victims will feel invalidated by the people around them. This is absolutely a problem, and it's one that will be reduced by further public education (as it has already been reduced over the past decades). For you personally, I hope the evidence that people (in general) understand the seriousness of women's violence may help alleviate these feelings.

---

All that being said, this still doesn't address what can actually be done about female-on-female violence (or violence more broadly). I have a few thoughts (many of which are already being implemented to varying degrees).

In reference to child sexual abuse (many of these would apply to both male and female abusers):

There's much better awareness that most child molesters are known to the victim (i.e., rather than "stranger danger"), however there's still much too little discussion on the implications of this. For example, many, many, child abusers position themselves as "pillars of the community", in part to get access to victims but also to make it seem inconceivable to other adults that they would ever (or ever intend to) abuse a child. In many cases, these abusers don't just groom the child, they groom the adults around them as well, so that the adults are more likely to ignore or excuse any evidence of abuse as "not possible" given the person's reputation. This is a very significant problem, and one that needs to be addressed to continue making headway in preventing CSA. Increasing awareness of and addressing this problem will help prevent these abusers from gaining and keeping access to kids. (As a note this is a specific manifestation of the first point of the above list.)

More detailed screening of applicants for positions that involve access to vulnerable populations (children, students, juvenile offenders, etc.) would also help with the above problem.

Some (many?) cases of abuse are missed by adults because the children don't have the language needed to communicate the problem (e.g., use of euphemisms for genitals, no discussion of what is considered sexual activity, etc.). Sex education programs aimed at rectifying this is absolutely essential in helping prevent CSA.

Related to the above point: reforms and education for the justice system concerning child-friendly reporting procedures and education for parents to circumvent common issues with child testimony.

Removal of the statute of limitations for CSA (or sex crimes in general).

Increasing education and awareness around child-on-child sex abuse (COCSA). COCSA is becoming an increasing problem around the world, so addressing it is essential.

In reference to intimate partner violence (again many will apply to both male and female offenders):

We need more research into same-sex domestic violence on almost every topic. In particular, I can find no studies concerning the prevalence of situational vs coercive controlling violence in same-sex relationships. This is important because the best response to these types of violence is significantly different (e.g., situational violence may respond to rehabilitation/counseling whereas counseling can make coercive controlling violence worse).

Better education/public campaigns concerning the impact of the "less" or "non-" violent tactics (like drugging, coercion, etc.). Public awareness on this issue is already much better than a few decades ago, but there's much more ground to be covered.

Education about identifying domestic abuse (per the coercive control, responsive, situational violence typology) in general, but also, in particular, for people in positions of power (i.e., police, prosecutors, victim advocates, etc.). Under the current procedures, many victims are being arrested as an abuser when they use responsive violence.

For the female-on-female domestic abuse shelter problem: I don't have a perfect solution, but potentially granting any who seek the shelter access but keeping anyone in a relationship separate from each other (i.e., via separate shelter locations, sheltering with separate volunteers who agree to keep the location confidential even from other advocates/victims/etc.).

Programs concerning rehabilitation for both child and domestic abusers have produced ... inadequate results. I honestly have no idea about improvements in this area for any type of offender, male or female, as despite the wide variety of programs attempted none appear to have a significant success rate/effect size.

---

I hope this clarifies my views on the topic?

In particular, you said "but as victim of abuse i want an answer tho because i never am given any", but I'm not sure what question you're referring to? As such, I tried to address the main points you brought up concerning social views on women's violence and also provide some initial suggestions about how to address domestic/sexual violence.

---

Most references are in the linked posts, the rest are below the cut:

Shannan Catalano. (2007). Intimate Partner Violence in the United States. Bureau of Justice.

Female Offender and Public Opinion - Perceived Seriousness of Crimes and Recommended Dispositions | Office of Justice Programs. https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/female-offender-and-public-opinion-perceived-seriousness-crimes-and.

Lantz, Brendan. “Victim, Police, and Prosecutorial Responses to Same-Sex Intimate Partner Violence: A Comparative Approach.” Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, vol. 36, no. 2, May 2020, pp. 206–27. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986219894429.

Hirschel, David, and Philip D. McCormack. “Same-Sex Couples and the Police: A 10-Year Study of Arrest and Dual Arrest Rates in Responding to Incidents of Intimate Partner Violence.” Violence Against Women, vol. 27, no. 9, July 2021, pp. 1119–49. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801220920378.

Younglove, Jane A., et al. “Law Enforcement Officers’ Perceptions of Same Sex Domestic Violence: Reason for Cautious Optimism.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence, vol. 17, no. 7, July 2002, pp. 760–72. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260502017007004.

Brown, Michael J., and Jennifer Groscup. “Perceptions of Same-Sex Domestic Violence Among Crisis Center Staff.” Journal of Family Violence, vol. 24, no. 2, Feb. 2009, pp. 87–93. Springer Link, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-008-9212-5.

[covid-safer-hotties]

Published in May, but it's obvious many people have not read this.

Also preserved on our archive.

New comprehensive review provides strong evidence that masks and respirators effectively reduce the transmission of respiratory infections like COVID-19, based on analysis of over 400 studies from multiple disciplines.

A comprehensive new review published in Clinical Microbiology Reviews provides strong evidence that masks and respirators are effective in reducing the transmission of respiratory infections like COVID-19. The review, conducted by an international team of 13 researchers, analysed over 400 studies from multiple disciplines, including epidemiology, public health, engineering, and social sciences.

'Our review confirms that masks work, with a clear dose-response effect,' said lead author Professor Trisha Greenhalgh from the Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford. 'The more consistently and correctly you wear a mask, the better protected you are. Respirators, when worn continuously, provide even greater protection than ordinary masks.'

Masks, including cloth face coverings and disposable medical masks, help reduce the spread of respiratory droplets and aerosols. Respirators, such as N95 and FFP2 devices, are designed to filter out smaller airborne particles and fit more tightly to the face, providing a higher level of protection.

The team's novel contributions include re-analyses of key clinical trials and observational studies, as well as a synthesis of evidence from fields ranging from fluid dynamics to anthropology. This comprehensive approach allowed the researchers to not only assess the effectiveness of masks under experimental conditions, but also to explore the real-world factors that influence their use and impact.

While the review found no serious harms from mask-wearing, it did identify some challenges, such as discomfort, communication difficulties – for hearing-impaired people for example – and environmental waste. However, the authors frame these as opportunities for further research and improvement rather than fundamental flaws.

'We need to see these challenges as a call to action,' said co-author Dr Amanda Kvalsvig, an epidemiologist based at the University of Otago, who is herself deaf. 'By investing in better design, more inclusive policies, and clearer communication, we can optimise masks for real-world use and ensure that everyone can benefit from this powerful public health tool.'

The review also highlights the importance of clear, consistent public health messaging to support mask use and combat misinformation. While mask mandates can be effective, the authors emphasise the need for context-specific assessments that consider cultural factors and public acceptability.

'Masks are not just a technical intervention, but also a social and cultural one,' said co-author Professor Deborah Lupton from the University of New South Wales. 'To be effective, mask policies need to be grounded in an understanding of people's beliefs, behaviours, and real-world constraints.'

Looking forward, the researchers call for further studies to improve and optimise mask design, explore new technologies like nanotechnology, and develop more sustainable and inclusive solutions. They also emphasise the need for ongoing public engagement to bring about more evidence-based and constructive conversations around masks.

'This review shows that masks are a valuable tool in our pandemic response toolkit,' said Professor Greenhalgh. 'By continuing to build the evidence base, innovate in design, and engage the public, we can harness the full potential of masks to protect public health now and in future respiratory pandemics.'

Read the full article at: Masks and respirators for prevention of respiratory infections: a state of the science review Clinical Microbiology Reviews DOI: 10.1128/cmr.00124-23

journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/cmr.00124-23

[droctaviolovecraft]

TW: Body horror, indulced body horror, unnerving imagery

ANM-045-117-P:

Identification: eRa uM@ veZ umA caasA t0rta...

Responsible Researchers: Dr. Öctavio Kalev and Dr. Moon

Item #: ANM-045-C(rooked)

Threat Level: Nightmare 💀

Anomaly Type: Oneiric, reality-altering

Damage Type: Both 🔴🟣

Containment: ANM-045-C cannot be physically contained, as it manifests only in the dreams of affected individuals. Preventing exposure is currently only viable by inducing wakefulness through medications that inhibit REM sleep. The MOTHRA Institute is developing techniques to block or alter dreams, but no viable solution has been identified yet. All individuals reporting dreams of ANM-045-C must be immediately quarantined in a specialized medical ward called Base-045-HQ, with full psychological and palliative care provided. There is no known cure for the long-term effects of the anomaly.

Description: ANM-045-C, nicknamed "Papa Mangler" by "Patient Zero," manifests as a tall and deformed figure with a disturbingly eerie and unsettling appearance. Despite its simplistic black-and-white color scheme, its exaggerated physical features and unnatural movements induce intense psychological fear in those who encounter it.

ANM-045-C stands approximately 2.80 meters (9 feet 2 inches) tall with a severely emaciated frame. Its limbs are grotesquely long and thin, with arms and legs bent at sharp, impossible angles. The most striking feature of its limbs is its fingers, which extend up to 40 cm (15 inches) in length, resembling elongated claws. These fingers taper into thin, bony tips, which ANM-045-C frequently uses in its attempts to touch or torment its victims. The sharp, angular movements of its limbs, combined with its exaggerated proportions, give the entity a distorted, supernatural nature.

ANM-045-C's head is oval and static, with deep, glowing eyes, a pointed and stretched nose, and a wide, permanent grin. Many speculate that the entity wears a mask due to the smooth surface where its face should be. This "face" adds to its cold, emotionless behavior. It wears a formal black top hat, adding a bizarre formality to its appearance that starkly contrasts with its form.

The entity appears dressed in an entirely black outfit, including a long, flowing coat. The coat billows unnaturally, even in the absence of wind or movement, as if the fabric itself exists outside the normal rules of physics. ANM-045-C’s body is entirely monochromatic, except for one anomalous detail: its footprints. Whenever it walks or moves, it leaves behind glowing, colored footprints. These colors seem random, shifting from vibrant reds to greens, yellows, and purples. The footprints often stand out in sharp contrast to the black-and-white dreamscape that ANM-045 inhabits.

ANM-045-C is also reported to have long, unkempt hair. Its hair is thin and greasy, hanging in tangled strands beneath its top hat. Like the rest of its body, the hair is devoid of any color except black. Only the entity's "face" and limbs are white, with spots alternating between gray or dark.

ANM-045-C is classified as a purely oneiric anomaly, appearing only in the dreams of its victims. Once present, it converts the entire dreamscape into a black-and-white environment, devoid of life or warmth. The entity exhibits a highly predatory nature, seemingly omniscient within the dream, as it can teleport to any location within the dreamscape, actively pursuing its victims. ANM-045-C’s primary method of attack involves chasing and touching its victims, inflicting severe agony upon contact. Victims of ANM-045 awaken with severe physical symptoms resembling connective tissue diseases, including malformed or elongated limbs, abnormal flexibility, and skeletal deformities, leading to a progressive decline in health—symptoms akin to "extreme Marfan syndrome."

Affected individuals often exhibit severe psychological distress, reporting an overwhelming sense of dread and helplessness induced by the entity's pursuit. It is believed that ANM-045-C derives sustenance from the fear and torment of its victims.

Although the exact origins of ANM-045-C remain a mystery, it is theorized to be a manifestation of shared human trauma or a collective unconscious fear. The nature of this anomaly suggests a potential connection to mass hysteria or a deeply rooted, transcultural nightmare.

ANM-045-29-P:

Addendum 045-C-02: Effects of Contact with ANM-045-C

When an individual is touched by Papa Mangler within the dream, the experience is described as an immediate and overwhelming wave of excruciating pain, concentrated at the point of contact and rapidly spreading throughout the body. The pain is often described as a burning or tearing sensation, as if the victim’s bones and muscles are being stretched, compressed, or twisted into unnatural shapes.

Upon waking, the victim initially feels disoriented, with the intense pain persisting for a few seconds before rapidly escalating. Medical evaluations have confirmed that individuals touched by ANM-045-C exhibit symptoms similar to extreme forms of Marfan syndrome, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, or other connective tissue disorders, but these symptoms manifest in exaggerated and grotesque ways, far beyond the scope of any known natural disease.

Documented symptoms of exposure to ANM-045-C:

1. Severe Hyperflexibility and Joint Dislocation: Victims often display extreme joint hypermobility, with their limbs contorting into unnatural positions. In most cases, the joints spontaneously dislocate or bend backward, causing further physical and psychological suffering. Some victims describe feeling their bones shifting and stretching under the skin as if manipulated by an invisible force.

2. Limb Elongation: Some victims report that their limbs grow several meters within minutes after waking, resulting in grotesquely long and disproportionately large appendages. This rapid growth puts immense strain on muscles and connective tissues, often leading to severe lacerations and internal damage.

3. Skeletal Structure Deformation: The skeletal system of affected individuals undergoes rapid and extreme deformation, particularly in the spine, ribs, and facial bones. This deformation results in hunched backs, twisted limbs, and pronounced facial disfigurements. In several cases, the victim’s bones began to fuse or calcify in strange, asymmetrical patterns, leading to permanent disabilities.

4. Extreme Pain and Neurological Damage: Victims report that the pain caused by Papa Mangler lingers long after waking, often intensifying over time. Nerve damage, particularly in the extremities, leads to constant sensations of burning, tearing, or numbness. Many victims develop neurological disorders, including tremors, loss of motor control, or partial paralysis.

5. Tissue Degeneration: As the deformities progress, victims suffer rapid breakdowns of connective tissues, skin, and muscles. Open wounds and lesions appear on the body, particularly in areas where bones or joints have been severely displaced. This tissue degeneration leads to infections, necrosis, and, in most cases, death within weeks to months after initial contact.

6. Increased Psychological Distress: In addition to physical symptoms, victims exhibit extreme psychological distress, including persistent nightmares, anxiety, paranoia, and hallucinations. Many victims claim to continue sensing Papa Mangler’s presence even after waking, describing an invisible weight pressing on their chest or an unseen figure standing at the edge of their vision.

ANM-045-0-P - Case Study:

Victim: Kamila [REDACTED] (Subject 045-0-P) Incident Date: ██/██/1956

Age: 26

Sex: Female

Termination Date: N/A

ANM-045-0-P was conducting research on ANM-045-C when she began experiencing recurring nightmares involving the entity. During the third recorded episode, Kamila described being chased by ANM-045-C in a desolate, black-and-white urban landscape. She tried to escape the entity by fleeing into an alleyway but was cornered. Papa Mangler extended his skeletal hand and brushed her shoulder before the dream abruptly ended.

Description: Upon waking, ANM-045-0-P exhibited severe curvature and deformity in her spine, leaving her hunched and off-balance. She was diagnosed with severe kyphosis, which caused compression of her nerves and organs. Although she underwent corrective surgery, she did not regain mobility or sensation. The researcher remains in critical condition, reliant on a wheelchair and physical therapy.

Despite intensive medical intervention, Kamila succumbed to rapid degeneration of her connective tissues within two weeks, her body having become deformed beyond recognition. Her final journal entry read: “It’s not just the pain; it’s the feeling of being hollowed out. Like he’s still with me, twisting my bones even when I’m awake. I can hear him... Papa Mangler... waiting.”

---

Biological Studies:

Extensive research into the physical consequences of contact with ANM-045-C reveals a unique alteration in the victim’s genetic structure. While the symptoms mimic certain connective tissue disorders, biopsies have shown unprecedented acceleration in tissue growth and disintegration, suggesting that ANM-045 introduces a foreign agent into the victim’s body, speeding up cellular degradation and elongation. The exact mechanism by which this occurs remains unknown, but studies suggest a breakdown in proteins responsible for tissue elasticity, leading to the chaotic and exaggerated deformities seen in victims.

Additionally, victims of ANM-045-C universally exhibit a sharp increase in stress hormones and neural activity, particularly during REM sleep. It is hypothesized that Papa Mangler’s connection to his victims may persist beyond the initial contact, slowly warping both the body and mind until the individual succumbs to either their deformities or madness.

Termination Protocols:

Due to the extreme physical and psychological damage inflicted by Papa Mangler, euthanasia is recommended in cases where the victim’s condition has deteriorated beyond the point of recovery. However, containment personnel should be prepared for potential violent outbursts from victims, as many experience psychotic episodes caused by the entity’s continued presence in their psyche.

As a result, the underground Base-045-HQ was founded in Massachusetts, USA, to house all victims of ANM-045-C before and during any experiments, analysis, interviews, or future euthanasia procedures.

---

Behavioral and Psychological Profile:

The exact personality of ANM-045-C remains ambiguous, as it does not verbally communicate with its victims. However, through numerous dream reports, certain traits and behavioral patterns have emerged.

Papa Mangler exhibits playful behavior. He appears to enjoy terrorizing his victims, prolonging the chase within the dream and appearing when the victim least expects it. He often displays mocking gestures, such as tipping his hat or making a theatrical bow before beginning his pursuit. His movements, though unpredictable, often carry an air of deliberate precision, as if he is aware of the fear he is inducing and takes pleasure in the slow unraveling of his victim’s psyche.

Several male victims have reported that Papa Mangler displays what they described as “effeminate” behavior during their dreams. Though this has been difficult to define scientifically, victims frequently report that the entity moves with a certain flamboyance, incorporating exaggerated gestures such as dramatic hand movements, overly stylized poses, or an exaggerated and theatrical walk. Some victims claim he approaches them in a flirtatious or mocking manner, adding an additional layer of discomfort. This perceived behavior is likely part of ANM-045-C’s psychological manipulation, exploiting social anxieties and discomforts for added emotional impact.

Despite his complex behavioral profile, ANM-045-C does not speak or make vocal sounds (except for exaggerated sighs, mocking chuckles, or groans). Instead, he relies on facial expressions, hand movements, and body language to communicate his intentions. In some cases, he has been observed slowly tapping his long fingers together or running them along his own face or surroundings as a form of silent mockery.

ANM-045-C’s colorful footprints are a unique signature of his presence. Even after victims wake up, they often claim to continue seeing flashes of color in the periphery of their vision, reminiscent of ANM-045-C’s footprints. This lingering effect suggests that Papa Mangler’s influence may extend beyond the dream world, leaving a lasting psychological impact on those who encounter him.

There are cases where Papa Mangler prolongs his interaction with his victims, as if relishing their suffering before finally inflicting physical damage through touch. However, it is unclear if he directly kills his victims within the dream. Instead, he ensures that the waking world continues their torment through extreme and grotesque physical deformities, which ultimately lead to a slow and agonizing death.

Addendum 045-C-01: Incident Report

The first documented case of Papa Mangler occurred during the 1950s, discovered by Dr. Öctavio Kalev, who reported frequent nightmares involving a distorted figure resembling the entity. Within a few weeks, several patients reported similar experiences, with one undocumented victim eventually succumbing to the same physical symptoms later described in future afflicted individuals. The victim's final dream journal entry stated: "Papa Mangler comes for me; I see his face getting closer every night. He wants to consume my dreams and my will to live..."

Dr. Moon continues research on ANM-045-C, focusing on dream modification as a means of containment, though progress remains slow.

Current Status:

ANM-045-C remains uncontained. Research into methods of preventing or altering the dream patterns of affected individuals is ongoing.

Note: Under no circumstances should unauthorized personnel attempt to interfere with research on ANM-045-C or make contact with affected individuals without proper psychological training.

[all-pacas]

Don't leave us in suspense! Drop the baldirs gate takes!

the one literally on my mind right now:

there is not a single good astarion/halsin story out there. like prove me wrong i guess, i haven't looked at all of them, but every single one i dip my toes into goes:

uwu poor baby astarion so sad

uwu halsin takes care of him and teaches him consent

uwu halsin is very paternalistic and teaches astarion how to sex

uwu he Big

and it drives me bonkers. like fandom has the habit of infantilizing astarion anyway, making him out to be a poor sad victim. like other people have pointed out the hilarious "man whose personal journey is gaining agency -> let's take away his agency" fanfic pipeline already, but for real!

rambling about how emotionally stunted astarion is under the cut:

he doesn't like to talk about his trauma, but he's also clear that it is trauma. he isn't in denial. he knows he's fucked up. and yes, when it comes to sex it's a bit more of a gray area, but he's a willing participant. he has a bunch of horny comments. he very much wants to hook up with someone at the goblin party, and WILL fuck lae'zel if tav doesn't romance either first. he tends to not enjoy sex as much as he THINKS he will and disassociates and knows his feelings are all fucked up around it, but he is NOT naive or in denial. he actually seems pretty self aware about it! he knows he forces himself through seductions, he knows he uses sex as a tool, he doesn't like either thing but he's been doing it for a long time. he's not naive.

he's also just. not. vulnerable? in general? like the man whines and complains, but he's one of the least emotional people in camp, in that he HATES expressing his real feelings. he doesn't talk about feelings. shadowheart, by way of contrast, is standoffish and doesn't open up easily, but IS able to pretty plainly state when she likes and trusts you. astarion? he has no idea. he will say this. he doesn't admit to liking anyone or anything, and yes, trauma, etc., etc., but he's also just kind of emotionally closed off. in general. anything that isn't superficial is shut down.

astarion actually goes pretty far out of his way to NOT be uwu vulnerable. he HATES being pitied and looked down on, or being perceived as such. CONSISTENTLY. he hates it when you tell him you'll protect him. he doesn't like being seen as weak. my favorite example: he doesn't actually approve of you offering to be his personal juice box after the first bite: he does approve of you agreeing with HIS plan to eat bandits. he doesn't like charity; he likes agency. he'll still take advantage, because he'll take what he can get, but it's REALLY telling he consistently prefers the answer that gives him agency (eating bandits) over the easier solution that doesn't (being fed at tav's discretion). with durge it's even more obvious. he says repeatedly: he wants to be in this TOGETHER. he wants them to rely on HIM. he very, very, very much does not want to be a kept toy.

i think there's also some ambiguity about him calling off sex in his romance. he's VERY clear that he enjoyed sex with tav and sees them as very attractive; it's just that (as he also says) he doesn't know how to have a relationship that isn't framed around sex as a tool and payment. that's re-enforced by his stated vulnerabilities once tav stops sleeping with him: he sees sex as his primary purpose/his looks as his only selling point, and he worries about tav hooking up with the drow twins (slightly) or halsin (more so) as a result. and yes, he has lots of other trauma and issues to unpack on top of it: but from the outset, he's pretty clear that he wants to figure out how to have feelings and a relationship in a non-sexual context. the other stuff exists TOO. many things can be true. it's just that he states, his stated reason for withdrawing, is wanting to sort out his feelings for TAV, not sort out his sexual trauma. again, both are true. but also: BOTH are true. he's not just a sad traumatized boy, he's also and equally trying to learn how to Relationship in a different way than he's used to.

so going back to halsin, who i'm not trying to demonize. all these FANFICS, man. halsin teaching astarion about uwu consent and taking care of him in a strong and paternal way. that's like. the last thing in the universe astarion would want. he'd go full cat exposed to water. and i'm not saying the ship can't happen or whatever, but it's such a common thread in the fanfics it drives me bonkers.

[adoubledoseoforiginalsin]

Don't support institutions that need you but only as second class citizens.

Why Women Should Leave Religion

By: 4B Admin September 4, 2024

It’s astonishing that so many women continue to follow religions that openly suppress them. Across the globe, women are often excluded from leadership roles in their respective faiths, whether it’s Christianity, Islam, Judaism, or others. Women cannot become bishops in the Catholic Church, imams in Islam, rabbis in Judaism, or hold the same religious authority as men in most organized faiths. The system is designed in a way that relegates women to subservient positions, often framing their primary purpose as wives, mothers, or caretakers.

This is no accident. Religions, most of which were created by men, were never designed to elevate women. They were built to maintain male dominance and control. The fact that so many women follow these man-made belief systems represents an abusive relationship—one that is sustained through centuries of conditioning, fear, and cultural pressure. From an early age, many girls are taught to accept these limitations without question, believing that this is their place in the world. But this belief is not divine; it’s deeply patriarchal.

The Power Imbalance: Women in Religion

The power imbalance between men and women is baked into the very foundations of most religions. In many faiths, men are seen as the head of the household, and husbands are often given near-absolute authority over their wives. Religious texts and leaders consistently reinforce these roles, telling women to be obedient, modest, and quiet. Even in more liberal religious communities, women still face barriers to fully exercising the same rights and privileges as men.

Women following these religions are essentially engaging in a system that teaches them to accept inequality as divine law. They are told their suffering, sacrifice, and silence are virtues, that submission to a higher male power—whether that be their husbands or God himself—is the ultimate form of faith. This is not empowerment. This is not equality. This is subjugation, plain and simple.

Religion as a Low-Level Thought System

Many people cling to religion out of fear or tradition, thinking that faith in a “magical father in the sky” will somehow solve the world’s problems or offer them protection. Yet, look around: wars rage on, atrocities happen, and women and girls continue to be violated, oppressed, and mistreated under the watchful eye of this so-called god. If such a powerful figure really existed, why is he so ineffective at protecting his believers?

Religion often operates at a low level of thinking, promoting simple answers to complex problems and encouraging passive acceptance rather than active resistance. Women are told to pray, to ask for divine intervention, and to be patient while enduring their suffering. But waiting for a mythical male deity to step in and save you is a waste of time. Women don’t need a savior; they need to reclaim their autonomy.

Embrace Science, Reject Religion

What should women do instead? Embrace science, logic, and independence. The world doesn’t need more prayer—it needs more women standing up for themselves, building their own paths, and rejecting systems that aim to keep them in chains. Science offers real solutions to real-world problems, whether it’s through medical advancements, technological innovation, or social progress. Unlike religion, science doesn’t tell women to stay quiet or stay home—it empowers them to learn, grow, and take control of their own destinies.

A growing number of women are already taking the female separatist route, creating communities and ideologies that focus on women’s strength and solidarity rather than subservience to men. It’s time for more women to reject religious dogma, which keeps them tethered to oppressive systems, and instead focus on building a future where women have the freedom to think, act, and lead without fear of divine retribution or societal judgment.

The Real Beneficiaries of Religion

At the end of the day, who benefits from women’s continued participation in religion? Men. Religions are structured in ways that protect male dominance, often under the guise of spiritual leadership or divine will. The religious establishment is a patriarchal system that keeps women in subservience while propping up male authority. The longer women remain in these systems, the longer men get to retain their power and control.

It’s time to stop feeding into the illusion. Religion, in its traditional, male-dominated form, does not serve women. It was never meant to. Women don’t need religion to find meaning, purpose, or moral guidance. They can find all of these things through self-awareness, community, education, and mutual support with other women who seek freedom and equality.

Take Control, Don’t Pray for It

The message is simple: stop praying for a god to rescue you, and instead rescue yourself. Every moment spent hoping that some higher power will change your life is a moment wasted. Women have the power to make change themselves. You don’t need a god to give you permission to be strong, smart, and independent. It’s already within you.

Religion is not a pathway to freedom or empowerment for women—it is a tool of control designed to keep women subservient. Rejecting these outdated belief systems is not just an act of rebellion; it’s an act of self-liberation. Women deserve more than what religion offers, and it’s time they take control of their own lives, their own futures, and their own power. ♀

Written by 4B Admin

Female separatism provides a radical approach to achieving true freedom by establishing women-only spaces that reject patriarchal norms and empower women to live autonomously. No sex with men, no giving birth, no dating men, and no marrying men.