#shc system

[harrowlark]

Sorting More Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes with Sorting Hat Chats

This post uses the Sorting Hat Chats system, originally created by @sortinghatchats. It’s a personality system, sort of like mbti or enneagram, except it developed right here in fandom for talking about and analysing fictional characters.

SHC is about two things — your motive (called your primary) and your method (called your secondary). You can read a full explanation of the system over here (thanks, @wisteria-lodge!)

@the-phoenix-heart has already done a great post on Coriolanus and Lucy Gray over here, which I recommend you go and read if you haven’t already! But since I have A Lot Of Thoughts about this book (and am currently writing a longfic about it that’s going to end up at 200k+, whoops) I figured I’d chat about the sortings of a few of its other characters.

Also, good lord this ended up long for a post just about three characters. Like, grab some snacks, grab a glass of water. The rest of this post is below the cut, to protect your dash. You ready? Let’s go!

Sejanus Plinth — Double Lion with a Badger primary model and possibly a singed secondary

Starting with his primary — Sejanus is a good example of how Badgers and Paragon Lions (that is, Lions with Badger values) can be really difficult to distinguish from one another, especially in fiction. People are people and this means something to him, in a way it doesn’t to either the Capitol or his father. It’s a Badger ideal, but it’s not exclusive to Badgers. Although Sejanus is so incredibly heartfelt about it that I do think he’s a Felt primary (Lion or Badger).

There’s his angst about leaving Two, his community that he still considers an incredibly important part of his identity, that could be a Badger primary thing… but it also could be a human thing. And it’s so tied up in his guilt for his father’s actions during the war, and I think any primary could be hit hard by a parent producing munitions for a war against their own people. (And later using the money from said munitions to save their own skins and move away from home. Sejanus has reams of survivor’s guilt, and that’s just a person thing.)

I could still be convinced either way, I think (and if anyone reading has strong opinions, I’m curious to hear your thoughts!). But I’ve come down on Lion for him, and that’s because of the way he talks so readily about systems and what’s right, not just the Badger that’s a person! stuff. When Dr. Gaul says it’s the Capitol’s right, to treat the Districts how they choose, he doesn’t come back with they’re people, how could you? but meets her at her level, Idealist to Idealist. “You’ve no right.” Everyone is born with life and freedom, and “they’re not yours for the taking.”

There’s also the way he lives for so long in the Capitol without giving an inch. Badgers are External primaries, meaning they tend to adopt the values of their larger communities. I’d expect a Badger to have more… doubt, more misgivings. Or to dehumanise the Capitol more, as a way to cope. But Lions have a way of digging in their heels and saying no, I know what’s right. They’re also, classically, the most at peace with being loners. And Sejanus isn’t happy being alone in the Capitol… but you get the sense he’d choose it every time over compromising his ideals.

I also think having him as a Lion creates an interesting read on the way he bonds so easily with Coriolanus and not with his father, despite the two being really quite similar people in a lot of ways. Sure, Coriolanus is charismatic and trying to be liked in a way that maybe Strabo isn’t, I’m sure that’s part of it. But Coriolanus, fellow Lion primary, also seems to just… get it, where Sejanus is coming from with his ideals. Coriolanus doesn’t like it — Sejanus is rejecting everything that his Lion has been fighting for most of his life. But he gets the innate drive, because he’s the same way with his own success, his safety and control, his family’s power. So he slots it into his calculations about how to act around Sejanus and moves on. Whereas I get the sense that Strabo probably doesn’t understand Sejanus in quite the same way.

(External primaries — Badger and Bird — have this knack for just deciding to like something, or to be alright with something. In parents, this can often manifest in expecting their kids to be able to do the same thing. I don’t think we have enough information on Strabo to conclusively sort him, but I do wonder if that’s what’s going on here.)

All that being said — groups and his community in Two, forming one with the rebels, are important enough to Sejanus that I’m going to say he has a full Badger model, rather than just being a Lion with Badger ideals.

As for his secondary, he’s a Lion, through and through. He goes the direct route, he’s unapologetically himself. He can do the Lion secondary “dimmer switch” where he stays quiet about parts of himself or his ideals — he would have had to learn that, to survive as long as he did. But the moments where he’s at his most powerful… I’m coming back to that conversation with Dr. Gaul again. He stands his ground and says “You’ve no right”. It might not get him anywhere in the text itself, but as a reader that’s a powerful moment. Even Coriolanus is grudgingly impressed by his pluck.

In this he’s like Katniss, another Lion secondary. She’s at her most powerful when she can stand her ground, speak her truth, and shoot straight for the problem at hand. It’s the berries, it’s speaking from the heart in her propos, it’s shooting Coin. But it’s also such a dangerous thing to be in Panem, and Collins is keenly aware of that. It so easily could have gotten her killed. Sejanus is a case where it did.

An Aside on the Way Collins Writes Idealists vs Loyalists That Has Become it’s Own Section as it’s So Damn Long

The contrast between Sejanus and Katniss is also a good example of the way Collins tends to write about Idealist primaries (Lion and Bird) vs Loyalists (Snake and Badger). When Collins writes Idealists, they have a tendency to sort of… careen off some edge or another, for their drive, or their ideals, or their philosophy.

Coriolanus loses himself in his drive for control, safety. He makes himself someone who will thrive in the Capitol, because he values his own comfort more than he values the snatches of empathy, of another way forward, that he ponders throughout Ballad. And so he murders the part of himself that cares. The boy who told Lucy Gray that he should be like Sejanus and try to quit the Games ends up trying to kill them both. This is his tragedy.

Gale loses himself in his drive to defeat the Capitol. He makes himself someone who has what it takes to help win the war, because he values justice and perhaps revenge more than he values the human life on the ground. And so he murders the part of himself that cares. The boy who told Katniss that he’d protect their families above everything gets Prim killed. This is his tragedy.

Coin you can read as either or both of the above, depending on how much you think she believed in rebel justice vs her own security and power. We’ll get to Dr. Gaul later on, but she’s also an example of someone who cared more for her own safety and philosophy than the lives of the people she has power over.

It’s not as simple as “good Loyalists, bad Idealists” — certainly the Idealists in this series are written sympathetically, even when the text disagrees with them. We understand Coriolanus wanting his family to be safe and fed. We understand Gale wanting justice. But surviving in a dystopian dictatorship, under that kind of violent oppression, is hard, and enacting meaningful change is even harder. Every single character has to grapple with that, but the Idealists tend to get the worst of it. Whether they choose to submit for personal gain like Coriolanus or fight fire with fire like Gale or Coin, they lose something of themselves in the process, and it drives them to tragedy one way or another.

And then there’s Sejanus. Sejanus, who knows the risk of loosing himself, who’s seen his father do the exact same thing and who knows what the cost of that has been. He will not murder the part of himself that cares. He will not even pretend. But he doesn’t know how to move forward for his ideals, without that first act of self-mutilation, and he can’t live with himself for that.

And… this is speculation, but I think maybe he’s terrified that he’s destined for it anyway. “What makes you think I could do that?” he asks Coriolanus, when Coriolanus says he can do good with the Plinth fortune when he inherits. There are lots of reasons Sejanus might say that. Maybe it’s just unthinkable to him to say that sort of money could do good. Maybe, in SHC terms, it’s a sign of burning on his secondary, that he doesn’t think he’s capable of his own actions doing good. But I also think it’s possible that he really doesn’t think he’ll get that far with his whole self intact, after the pressure exerted on him by his father, by the Capitol. That he thinks either his compassion will die young, or he will. So he nearly looses himself to despair, instead.

But to be a Loyalist, in this series, is to have something that grounds you. It protects you from loosing yourself the same way. Peeta is aware of the risk of self-mutilation. “I don’t want them to change me,” he says, before his first Games. But he’s a Snake primary, and the way he keeps hold of himself is his devotion to Katniss. To change him, Coriolanus must remove this devotion — the hijacking — but even this cannot last. Katniss, likewise, is kept focused and steadied by her own Snake primary, by the people she fights for. It’s still difficult — wars have a way of coming for the people you love. But even when Katniss is at her lowest point, her love still centres her. When she kills Coin, it’s “for Prim”.

The text is saying — yes, the world is big and you are very small. But if you can help one person, that means something. If you can fight for one person, that means something. And those small acts of kindness and love are where change comes from, in the end.

This is how I think Lucy Gray manages to be the rare Idealist in this series who doesn’t careen off some edge or another. Because that sort of small-scale love is her ideal. She’s focused, she’s grounded, she cares for the Covey and her own personal freedom and the impact of her own actions on the world.

And she’s flexible, about her ideals. When Coriolanus and Coin and Gale and Dr. Gaul careen off that edge it’s sort of… it, for them. There’s no coming back, they’re too committed for that. Sejanus, if I’m right, is terrified that will be him, too. Lucy Gray is no stranger to becoming morally grey. She’s a victor, she’s killed people. But, to her, this does not prevent her from doing the work to walk on the right side of the line. This does not excuse her from doing the work to walk on the right side of the line. It’s her life’s work and she will see it through.

And then we have Coriolanus. And the thing is, he starts off with these sort of small-scale ideals, too. He cares for his family, he cares for Lucy Gray, and he prioritises them over a lot. And you could read that as being a performance, or that he only cares for what their wellbeing could do for him. I know a lot of people read him that way. But there’s another reading where it’s at least a mix. I’d argue even his care for Sejanus winds up being at least halfway genuine. And in that reading… you get the sense that his care for them could have been what saved him, if only he had let it.

Dr. Volumnia Gaul — Double Bird

Double Birds in fiction are classically either the (mad) scientist or the mentor figure. With Dr. Gaul being both, is it any wonder this is her sorting? @the-phoenix-heart already mentioned her sorting in their post, but as that was a quick one-liner and I have Many Thoughts, I’m going to chat about her here for a little bit!

So, Bird primary — the way she mentors Coriolanus (and to a lesser extent the other Hunger Games mentors) is very Bird. She lays out the evidence of her system, her worldview, and expects this will be what convinces people to follow suit. @the-phoenix-heart wrote that Coriolanus probably built a Bird primary model for her, and I absolutely agree. And then there’s the bit where she says that what she loved about the war was that it proved her right… which is such an Idealist thing to say, but maybe swings a little more Bird, too. There’s that Bird drive for truth, as opposed to for a cause (which would swing Lion).

As for her Bird secondary, that’s obvious too. She loves plans, she loves tools, and she’s always working on tinkering with both to make them better. Her mutts are a beloved tool. The Games are a beloved tool. Coriolanus, fellow Bird secondary, takes a little while to come around to her ideals, but the Games as a tool? Control as strategy? He gets that immediately. “So obvious. Too obvious,” he says, about controlling the eternal war.

There’s an interesting thing about her Double Bird, mad scientist vibes, though, that I think separates her from the classic Double Bird scientist who gets so caught up in their scientific shenanigans that they don’t realise or care how “mad” they come off.

This is pure speculation, but — what do we think she was like, growing up? She’s sadistic, a “nerd”, quite probably some form of neurodivergent. What are the odds she was the “weird kid” in her class? Which is a hard thing to be under the best of circumstances, but in the Capitol? It must have been brutal. Thinking of her this way unlocked a lot about her character and motivations, for me.

No wonder she decided it was true that humanity is brutal, vicious, at constant war with itself. No wonder she doesn’t take on evidence that questions that truth. No wonder she loved the war, when everyone else suddenly saw what she did. No wonder she loves the Games, which specifically use children as an example of the brutal nature she sees in humanity. Finally, something to point to when people tell her that children are innocent.

And no wonder she values control so highly. I think she probably learnt quite young — at school, maybe at university — that fear is a powerful means of control, of personal safety. It’s one of the main tools she passes down to Coriolanus. Getting back to what I mentioned about her Double Bird, mad scientist vibes — in SHC terms, I think this is an Actor Bird costume she’s built for herself, as well as being reflective of her actual sorting. Everything “mad” about her seems so carefully calculated to manufacture a reaction. The nursery rhymes when she starts a conversation, that she drops the moment things get truly serious. The carefully planned encounter with Clemensia and the snakes. She’s using the trope itself as a tool, because she knows “the mad scientist” is something that scares people.

Tigris Snow — Badger Snake with an exploded Badger secondary model in Ballad and an Actor Bird secondary model in Mockingjay

Unlike every other character in this book who’s been sorted so far, Tigris never talks about ideals or truths or philosophies or causes. She talks about people — her family most of all, but others as well. Lucy Gray is a person, and that instantly matters to her. She’s definitely a Loyalist, but I could see Snake, I could see Badger. She’s a minor enough character that you could pull her either way. But I’ve come down on Badger for her for a couple of reasons. Apart from Sejanus, she’s one of the main mouthpieces for the “the districts are people and that matters” argument, which as I’ve said before isn’t exclusive to Badgers but is a Badger thing.

And it’s a small thing, but there’s the way she refuses to hear anything bad against her boss, Fabrica, as Tigris is so grateful she gave her a position in fashion. I think a Snake would be more likely to say that no, she doesn’t owe Fabrica anything, if Fabrica is going to treat her like that. But Badgers take their obligation to the group seriously, and they can run into problems with dismissing their own worth in the process.

As for her secondary… there’s definitely some Badger there. She’s the main caretaker in the Snow household and caretaking is classically a Badger secondary thing. But the fact that this is something she’s had to learn how to be makes me think it’s probably a model she’s picked up for that specific purpose — which then exploded, this girl seems to always be up all night working.

The biggest example of her problem-solving is Coriolanus’ Reaping Day shirt, and from that we learn that she’s adaptable. Take the fabric from an old pouch, exchange favours with the maintenance man, tell your boss her curtains need bleaching so you can slip in the shirt while you’re doing it. Rapid-fire Bird, Snake — she’s in her element, fashion, which makes it hard to distinguish between the two. But there’s the way she looks around at her environment for cues. The tesserae she takes from the walls on the maid’s bathroom for buttons.

And there’s also the playful way she seems to have of coming up with little words and phrases on the fly, as a kid. Nicknames like Coryo and the Grandma’am, and the mantra Snow lands on top. I think she’s a Snake secondary, the balance to Coriolanus’ Bird that made them such an effective team growing up. It’s the same thing we see with him and Lucy Gray, another Snake.

But then we arrive at Mockingjay, and Tigris feels so incredibly different. She’s this very carefully constructed persona of a tiger, enigmatic and silent with a purr when she talks. In SHC terms, it’s an Actor Bird costume, it’s too obviously constructed to be anything else. As for why she made it… that’s anyone’s guess. But it’s such a break from the way she presents herself in tbosas that has to have been part of the point.

One thing about that costume, though? She can’t take it off. It’s literally tattooed on her skin. And if there’s one thing Actor Birds (whether innate or modelled) don’t seem to like, it’s when they get stuck in one of their roles.

[enchantingwitchycottage]

has anyone here sorted the characters in oitnb? i finished the show a few months ago and sorted quite a few but i’m wondering what others’ thoughts are

[girlfromthecrypt]

Okay so i already lost my mind alil during Sawyers route. But i truly did love the update!

I will not even mention that i already told you i didn't trust your damn hide and seek game....

It was great!

I loved every RO interaction tho Flo is just the sweetest most lovable dude in the history of IFs. I love him so much. He leaves my poor MC speechless alot. And him coming to save the day was kinda hot ngl.

I loved all the effort you put in with the kids interaction it truly is a reflection that this isn't just a romance game or a creepy let's freak out liz game. 🙄

But it's also about the kids and they are just the sweetest. I love how you wrote the whole bullying scenario. God i deal with alot of those and you wrote it so well! And the kids all shine and i love how they have such different personalities and that it actually differentiates and shows when you read about them.

Sawyer was....sawyer.... idk. I can't say anymore about them other than they are gunning for Flo's top RO spot

I also love all the effort you put into the special moments with each RO and the kids and especially just the tattoos. Those were so dope and alot of effort. Shut up. Don't say it was nothing 😒

The game really is becoming a great balance of fun, romance and creepiness... i always try to ignore the creepiness until I'm telling some creepy voice to fuck off and that they can't join but that's just a regular update with u at this point. 🙄❤️

Lol so is "let's freak out liz" a whole genre, or...? xD

Yeah I recently had to work with a bunch of elementary school kids in kind of a similar setting to the one I'm writing about (I may or may not have known I would be doing this for a long time and it may or may not have inspired me to write Such Happy Campers in the first place) and it was EXHAUSTING but damn, did it give me some fun ideas for SHC. Kids are so... weird and silly and they're ALWAYS fighting. So yeah this experience has convinced me even more to make the campers stand out.

Also, a lot of the stuff I write into SHC relates to stuff I've seen and common experiences from my friends and family and me growing up. And venting about school system.

And no, I won't even say the tattoos were nothing. That shit was so. Damn. Extensive. Especially for something that's probably not gonna come up again. I'm convinced that it was worth it but ayyy it was a lot.

Btw I'm really really glad you're still enjoying this game and that you still love Flo (and also Sawyer hehe) and thanks for always writing these long asks I love them!!

[wisteria-lodge]

bird primary (in process of building system) + badger secondary

Hi! It’s been a while since I first took the shc quiz, and in retaking it recently I’ve had an unfortunate bit of identity crisis </3 Originally, I was Double Snake but now I’m sincerely doubting my primary. I was given Lion by the quiz, but I don’t think I’m full Lion as I don’t exactly have a “cause,” I’m just passionate about what I want (and what I want tends to be very self-focused and more selfish than I’d think of when I think Lion).

Well, you very well might be a Glory Hound Lion. :) It’s also possible that you’re sort of between causes - or morally bored - or a Fay Lion with a non-traditional definition of “good” and “bad.” Let’s see what we’ve got. 

But I don’t want to influence your judgement too much, so I’ll get into just talking about myself :) 

I’ve always been a very quiet person, and when I was younger I know it was because I had a fear of authority figures and disappointing them, whether it was my parents, a teacher, a coach, or anyone else. I still remember the one time I got told off in kindergarten for crouching in the door to the hallway to look at a caterpillar. Vividly. 

Fear of authority figures can definitely be a human thing, but it does hit external primaries (Badger and Bird) the hardest. 

Now, I’m still a quiet person though I think that’s mostly the social anxiety. I’d like to think I can hold a conversation if someone else starts it, but I’m very bad at initiating them unless I have a specific reason to. I can’t just go up to someone and start small talk, I’d die inside.

There might be a little Burning going on with your secondary. This is a very hopeless-sounding way of conceptualizing a pretty normal, neutral statement. “I initiate conversations when I have something I want to talk about.” Yeah! That’s how it works. “Nice weather we’re having” is not a start to a conversation, it is a phrase that means “I recognize you as a member of my social group and we are not enemies.” 

I’m at the point in my life where I’ve just started college, so the biggest decision in my life right now is choosing a major. I don’t know what I want to do after, only that I want it to be fulfilling. I don’t know if I could handle something that felt like a drag. However, my idea of ‘fulfilling’ has a lot to it. I want a job where it feels like I’m doing something that’s greater than myself 

Okay, definitely getting some Idealist primary (Bird or Lion) here. 

or something that won’t cause me to remain stagnant. I want to be able to grow in my job in some way and consistently gain new experiences—if it’s boring or too routine, I’ll hate myself for continuing in it. 

I’m thinking you might have an improvisational secondary. Maybe Snake - Snake especially loves new people, new experiences. 

For example, for a few months last year my only criteria was that I wanted to be able to travel a lot or live in a new place. 

That’s honestly a really great place to start looking. A lot of people absolutely do not want jobs that require a lot of travel. 

I’d also like to do something I want to do, but logically I know that’s not sustainable. Since I was seven or eight, I’ve wanted to be an author and that dream hasn’t really faded but realistically, I am not going to do that. The most I’d do would be minor in creative writing so I could have something creatively fulfilling as well as mentally fulfilling to occupy my time.

Every single author. Every single one of them. Had a day job of some kind before they were able to make it their full-time job. (Unless they were independently wealthy.) It’s common for even *successful* writers to have another thing they do, because I’ve been there, and putting pressure on your art to be the only thing that sustains you is pretty intense and can lead to burn out. 

So when I hear “I want to be an author but that’s not LOGICAL, that’s not REALISTIC,” number one thing I hear is Bird primary. “I want this, but my system says no, and so that’s what I’m going with.” 

And I’m… lightly suggesting… that it’s possible your system may be a little rigid, a little black and white. Maybe it could be cool to be a flight attendant, or pharmaceutical rep, or event coordinator and write a book on the side. 

The real reason I’m torn though is because I also put a lot of emphasis on what other people want me to do. 

This is a person thing, but it hits External Primaries hardest. I’m starting to like Bird for you. 

My mom wants me to go into computer science because she wants me to get a good, well-paying job out of college and has faith that I’ll be good at it. I’ve taken my first computer science class this year, and while she’s right that I am good at it at this level, I’m not sure if I will continue to be. I’ve been enjoying the challenge of a new subject so far, but I don’t know if this is what I want to tie myself to for the rest of my life. I do think I would be willing to, though. Like I said, I did enjoy the challenge. 

You’re sounding a little black-and-white again. You do not have to “tie yourself” to computer science for your whole life if you major in it in college. You will almost certainly not have the same job your whole life. I’m not sure that’s even possible anymore. There is a high level of probability that at some point you will do a job that does not currently exist, just because that’s the way the world works. 

If you like computer science now, great. If you fall out of love with it - maybe it gets predictable and boring - also fine. You’ll have experience, and be able to move sideways to something that suits the person you are in five years a little better. 

But I also have put an unreasonable amount of weight on what my English teacher from last year said to me when she told me I was a good writer and wanted to see me go into the arts in some way. And I kind of want that too but again, I also want a job that will make me money. I am not going to spend 4 years at a college just to get an English degree or something like that. So essentially, I still don’t know what I want to do. I’m working on it, but I want it to be my own decision at the end of the day. 

This sounds like a Bird primary decision making process to me. “My mom says x, my English teacher says y, the song “What Do You Do With a B.A. in English” from Avenue Q says z. I am trying to synthesize all of these into a workable model of the world.” (And I’m running into a few problems, because I want one option to be Objectively Correct, and another Objectively Incorrect.)

You want a job that’s creatively/emotionally fulfilling, allows for a lot of travel (and upward mobility within an organization?) and makes a lot of money right out of college. That’s a slightly tall order. But, you’re at college, and one of the functions of college is to sort yourself out, figure out who you are when you’re not part of your school/family/community. So if you are a Bird, and it sounds like you’re at a liberal arts school, you’re at the right place to try out a lot of things. And remember, you can put individual relevant *classes* that you’ve taken on your resume as well, not just your major. 

What I do know is that the most emotionally and mentally fulfilling thing I’ve ever done was stage manage in high school—I was head stage manager my senior year, and I had to somewhat build the position from the ground up since, as a result of COVID, there was no one left who’d stage managed in person. The amount of pride I felt at seeing the fall show was unmatched, and it did help that my director read out a series of acknowledgments that included me at the end of the final show :) That moment on stage after the bows is what comes to mind first when I’m asked to think of my happiest memory, and I think it’s only a little bit due to recency bias.

So you like being part of, and ORGANIZING a team. That’s very relevant information. (Badger secondary? Bird secondary? Your ask has been very primary focused so far.) 

I am not, by the way, even considering becoming a theater major. That sounds like a recipe for disaster equal to an English major.

Okay, hypothetically.  Thought experiment. (I’m absolutely not saying you do this.) But hypothetically, you major in theater. You participate in/stage manage 6-8 shows during your college career. Put that on your resume. If I’m a hiring manager, what does that tell me? That you’re organized and detail orientated. You work well with other people, are good at managing a team, have a strong work ethic. You probably are decently familiar with fundraising/advertising/permit wrangling. You’re a good abstract/outside the box thinker. You’re good at putting on presentations. Probably a good public speaker. Work well under pressure. Those are all pretty good, and honestly very flexible job skills. 

A surprising amount of the people I know in politics, business, non-profits, start-ups and general entrepreneur stuff actually have some kind of performing-arts background. My point is not that you should major in theater, or even minor in theater, my point is this is black-and-white thinking again. Once you leave school it’s not going to be ‘plug in A, B comes out.’ In every industry I’ve been in, or been adjacent to, it’s much more fluid than that. There’s also a lot more learning on the job than I expected there would be. You’re also allowed to have side gigs, and hobbies as an adult. 

(it’s possible extremely specialized might work slightly differently. But the dentists and optometrists I know also come from like, idk. Dentist/optometrist *families?*) 

The most difficult moments in my life, I’ve realized, have been when I’ve felt unfulfilled. I have to be stimulated enough to be challenged or I will quickly grow unmotivated, lethargic, and genuinely depressed. Stimulation for me can come in the forms of relationships, school work, extracurriculars, or creative inspiration. As long as one of those things is interesting to me and taking up enough of my time, I find that my mental state is significantly better. This past semester, for example, I did at a community college so I could transfer to my current one in the spring, and the classes were so painfully easy that I found myself napping in almost all of my free time and doing less than nothing except when I had to. I also withdrew from my friends because at that point, talking to them was too much effort. If that seems like a contradiction, it is.

It sounds like you might actually have just been depressed. It also sounds very possible that you’re some flavor of neurodivergent, and under-stimulation can absolutely be the kiss of death if that’s the case. As Sherlock Holmes puts it, “I have a curious constitution. I never remember feeling tired by work, though idleness exhausts me completely.”

Talking to [my friends] would likely have helped, but I couldn’t be bothered. Being very alone, very bored, and incredibly under stimulated have led to some of my worst mental health periods—and I use this as an example because it feels very telling and also because I don’t want to go too terribly dark, not because it’s necessarily the worst I’ve ever felt, if that makes sense. Losing close friends also affects me poorly. 

I don’t have much data about how you actually solve problems, so I’m not sure about your secondary. There are a lot of mentions of friends, being part of a group, and not liking when that isn’t the case? But you could just be a social version of any of the primaries.

I don’t make friends easily, so I only have two very memorable losses. The first explained the situation to me afterwards and apologized, and it very much wasn’t her fault. But for whatever reason, I still can’t get all the way over it. It was a very online thing, so I remember what I saw her and the people she left me for say. We used to be about as close to best friends as you could get in two years or so, but we don’t really talk now at all. We’re cordial, but the last time we spoke was also in November, which as of writing this was around three months ago. 

Interesting. You had a falling out with a friend, and she apologized for the situation and explained why she behaved badly? Now, it’s interesting that you want the fact that there’s a sensible explanation to wipe out all the emotion associated with the friend break up (or think that it should wipe out the emotion associated with the friend break up…) That way of seeing the world - emotions are unreliable, I want to be able to logic myself into feeling however I want to feel… that’s extremely Bird primary. 

The second one also really messed me up, and I’m still bitter and conflicted about it. I know there should be no timeline on moving on, but six months to still be periodically obsessing over it seems excessive to me personally. 

That one was a bit more my fault, but it certainly wasn’t entirely and every so often I get irrationally angry that this friend didn’t give me the time to think and resolve everything properly. I don’t know exactly where we stand since it was kind of a mutual breaking off of the friendship, but it wasn’t really as clean as that and I’d thought we’d eventually talk about it again, but we haven’t. I’m not the one who made the final call, so I’m not going to reach out again first either. 

This is also very Bird primary to me. It’s not so much that the friendship ended that bothered you, it’s that you haven’t been able to make sense of why it ended, and you low-key resent this friend not giving you a logical, cohesive explanation. 

I also ended up asking the first friend after a few weeks whether or not it had been at all my fault when they’d broken off the friendship just to reassure myself that the feelings brought up by the second friend (i.e. I was a toxic and terrible friend) weren’t true. I knew it hadn’t been, and she told me again that it hadn’t been. But it had felt like a pattern, so I had to check. 

Checking in with an outside source to confirm your idea of yourself actually seems like a very Badger secondary move. 

Anyway. 

I think most of all I want to be loved and appreciated for who I am. But not for what I do. 

Yeah, that’s the dream. To be loved because you’re a person, and not because you’re a tool/trophy/symbol.

I want to be loved by those I love and admired by my peers, but not for being able to appear more competent than I am, if that makes sense. I do, however, want to be the best in whatever I do, but being listed or seen as among the best will work in a pinch. 

I see a little of what made the quiz give you Lion. I don’t think you are, but this fantasy sounds very young Lion. I want to be seen as the best, but the best at what… is less important. There’s also a recurring theme of an intense need for external validation - from your mom, your teachers, your director, even in your fantasy here, it’s important that you’re listed as “best” on some kind of external list. I suspect this might be a young Bird thing, but it’s a thing to keep an eye on, because that’s a dangerous sort of drug. 

That seems contradictory to my desire not to be put on a pedestal, but that’s different in my mind. I don’t want to be seen as unreachable. And those I love seeing me for what I do before who I am hurts just a bit.

I think I’m liking Badger secondary for you, if only because a big part of this fantasy is the desire to be *relatable* 

Finally, because I fear this is getting too long, family dynamics. I grew up Christian and am not anymore, which probably says a lot already. 

… I mean, I’d love if you went into why. Intense relationship with religion is often a marker of Bird primary, but there are lots of reason to step away from religion, and they all say a lot about you. 

My mom and dad both have high expectations of me—which you might have already been able to gather—but they absolutely love me. I suspect my dad wants me to do what will make me happy first and foremost, but I think my mom, though she wants the same, believes that success will bring me happiness. She’s not entirely wrong, in fairness. 

I also have a younger sister!! If I am a Snake primary, she is the one person right now who I’d call my inner circle. She’s not always the best person and I’ve sided against her when it’s come to some of her choices, but I know she’s trying and I truly don’t think there’s anything she could do to make me stop loving her. That’s not exactly a rousing endorsement I know, but deep down she really is the sweetest and loveliest person I know (I suspect Badger primary for her btw). I really am so lucky to have her as my sister and I know she feels the same, and for that reason I’m always slightly worried she’ll be bitter if she’s ever compared to me, and I don’t want that for her at all.

If there’s a need for glory, it’s coming from your primary and not your secondary. I don’t know 100% about your secondary, but with the evidence I have I’m going to say that Badger is most likely. You want approval, but you don’t want the spotlight. 

Anyway! Thank you so much for reading through all of this if/when you do, I hope it wasn’t too much to work with but was enough to glean an understanding of Me. I look forward to seeing what you have to say about it :)

I really, really enjoyed reading and going through this. 

[arizonaraine]

SHC: Kevin McCallister, Home Alone

So, I've not posted anything in years. But I am alive and well, thanks for asking :) Merry Christmas to those who celebrate! I recently rewatched Home Alone and have been thinking about my favorite blonde home security system's sorting. See TLDR below if you want a summary.

Kevin starts the movie as a very immature Snake primary. He wants what he wants-- a plain cheese pizza and a room to himself-- and doesn't seem overly concerned with the feelings of others. When he wakes up and discovers his entire family has disappeared, his first response is jubilation. I personally think that a Badger primary would have been pretty disturbed by this sudden lack of community, and a Bird would have questioned a bit more exactly what happened. Kevin, as a Snake primary, goes about living his best life. He jumps on the bed, raids his brother's room, eats a massive ice cream sundae, and watches the movie he was excluded from viewing.

The more time he spends alone, though, the more he realizes that he loves and misses his people. He sleeps with the family picture under his pillow. When making his request to Santa, he says, "I just want my family back. No toys, no presents, nothing but Peter, Kate, Buzz, Megan, Linnie, and Jeff. And my Aunt and my cousins. And, if he has time, my Uncle Frank." Frank, it seems, hasn't made it into Kevin's tiered Snake primary loyalty system.

Another hint at his primary is his conversation with Old Man Marley. He says, "I don't care how mad I was, I'd talk to my dad. Especially around the holidays." His dad is important than being right in whatever disagreement separated Marley and his son. I think a Lion wouldn't have that same sentiment, even if they missed their parent.

Lastly, after he runs home from that chat with Marley at the church, Kevin says, "This is my house. I have to defend it." What makes it worth defending is that it's his.

I think that Kevin has an impressive Bird secondary, though an argument could be made for Snake. The way I see it, Kevin is a planner. In his post-shower monologue, he lists all the things he's done til that point, and then discusses what he plans to do later in the day. He makes grocery lists and clips coupons. He draws up a master plan for the defense of his house, using tools that he's collected up to that point in the movie (micro machines, Christmas ornaments, etc.). He utilizes the mannequins in the basement for the fake Christmas party.

While he's pretty good at pivoting, it doesn't seem to be where he's at his best. At the grocery store, he manages to avoid the cashier's questions (Actor Bird?), but he doesn't appear to take any pleasure in being sly. He uses the movie the trick Marv, but it leads to further suspicion from Harry, which spells trouble for Kevin. When he's caught at the end, he doesn't try to run or talk his way out of it-- he's just stunned. His plan, which had been going so well, failed! Thankfully, his Snake primary saves the day. The connection he forged with Old Man Marley pays off. (The ending scene where he and Marley wave at each other always makes me cry.)

TL;DR

Kevin McCallister is a Snake primary who is alone in his inner circle in the beginning, but realizes how much his family means to him and brings them into his value system. His Snakey connection with Old Man Marley saves him in the end. His Bird secondary enjoys laying plans, clipping coupons, and making lists. He can pivot when he needs to, but that's not the first tool that falls to his hand.

(@wisteria-lodge what's your archetype name for the Snake Bird again? :))

[reading-sometimes]

Equestria Girls SHC Sorting

This is part 1 of a 4-part series, since I'll be going through all of the movies. There's already a My Little Pony sorting that you can check out here. I agree with most of them, so I'll be focusing on characters that weren't covered or are exclusive to Equestria Girls, like Sunset, Sci-Twi, and Spike. A basic explanation of the system that I'm using by @wisteria-lodge is here.

Sunset: Badger Lion

Sunset starts off the movies as a villain, with a Glory Hound Lion primary model and a Bird secondary model. Sunset's obviously jealous of Twilight, because they're foils - they were both students of Princess Celestia. Sunset wanted power (her Glory Hound Lion primary) and became evil, while Twilight became a Princess, something that Sunset wanted all along.

Sunset also has a Bird secondary model, but she's really bad at using it until later in the series. She tries to make plans, but she's too impulsive to have foresight. Her Bird secondary is used to concoct plans like secretly taking photos of Twilight to show how she'd be a bad Fall Formal Princess, and editing photos to make it look like Twilight trashed the gym. Her plans are pretty bad, since she left the real photos on top of a trash can. Sunset's Lion secondary is pretty obvious - she throws the crown that she stole from Twilight through the portal.

Sunset's Badger primary is burned in the first movie - she bullies everyone around her so that she can be powerful. She dehumanizes everyone, and she says that she doesn't know anything about friendship. She uses her understanding of social situations to tear groups of friends apart. Hints of her Badger primary are visible, even when she's a villain. She says that she rules the school because she knows how to fit in. She didn't do anything to hurt her ex-boyfriend after she broke up with him, even though everyone expected her to (She says in the second movie that she never liked Flash. She was just using him to be more popular, but it's still nice that she didn't do anything to hurt him). She refuses to hurt Spike, and says that she's not a monster (which is ironic, since she turns into a demon in the next scene).

She wants to be a Princess more for acceptance than power, even though she doesn't realize that until she unburns. She only starts getting mad at Twilight when everyone starts praising her. When Sunset's a Princess, she focuses on how everyone will be loyal to her.

Twilight: Double Bird

Twilight has a Badger primary model that explodes as the movies go on. Twilight, just by existing, brings her group of friends together. She constantly talks about groups, primarily her group of friends. She doesn't understand why everyone in high school is divided into cliques, instead of everyone working together. She refuses to go back to Equestria, where all of her true friends are, if it means that the human world will be destroyed. The human world needs her more, so she's okay with staying there forever if it means that she can keep it safe. When Sunset starts crying, Twilight immediately forgives her.

Twilight's Bird secondary is endearingly obvious - the first thing that she does when she's transported to a new world is gather information about it. She finds a library so that she can research.

Spike: Snake Badger

Spike ran into the portal after Twilight, even though Princess Celestia forbade him from going with her. Everything that Spike does is for Twilight. Spike’s Snake primary is pretty obvious when he tells Twilight to ignore the versions of her friends in the alternate universe, because they aren't Twilight's real friends.

His Badger secondary is something that he uses all the time, mostly to talk Twilight out of anxious spirals. He's definitely more of a Courier Badger than a Bookkeeper Badger, even though he shows elements of both.

[thelongestway]

Not to comment on something you posted over a year ago, but based on my impressions of the SHC system I think Rezo would, like Zel, also be a Lion/Bird (albeit I am basing this partly on his Revo/Evo-R characterization as well as his Slayers Prime characterization.)

Ha! Long-term engagement is fantastic, so thank you for asking! Let me do A Take on this - but I don't remember Revo/Evo nearly as well, so if you've got something to add from that point, please do!

Rezo the Red Priest, one of the primary antagonists in Slayers, is an interesting case - the Lion Primary is certainly there! That single-minded devotion to curing his own eyesight has A LOT in common with how Zelgadis wants to cure his body. Actually, I think it's fairly safe to say that Zel probably copies his way of dealing from the one adult in his life. However, as far as Secondaries go... There are indeed points to be made for Bird. The sheer breadth of his knowledge - this is a man who goes on to master all the known types of magic to cure his ailment. But there's something to it that's more than tools. Rezo's... I want to say, expansive and systematic in a way few Bird secondaries ever reach, and he is also more nose-to-the-grindstone about it. Where Zelgadis picks up relevant tricks of the trade, Rezo just goes "well, if anything can fix this, it's magic." And he learns everything about magic. Not just what he thinks he needs to. He learns everything.

And the social side of how he works! Even though he doesn't really care for other people's blindness - at least at the point we see him in the first season of the anime - he acquires a reputation as one of the kindest mages, who goes on to heal other people in droves. It's this interesting combination - Rezo doesn't care about other people; but he also... Doesn't lie about his capabilities. He doesn't make up a Persona, the way Zel perhaps would have ("heartless swordsman!") Instead, he lets people project onto him and becomes what they need; he uses them for his own purposes but in a way that they are glad to be used.

He also doesn't keep people around for specific purposes. Bird secondaries have contacts; Rezo has minions and likely more than a few people who owe him their life and health. Even though he, too, has a lonely, ultimately selfish cause, he is enmeshed into Community to an extent Zelgadis would be terrified by.

And the way Zel gets through to him, when fighting Shabranigdo! "Do you really wish to destroy the world you wanted to see so much?" While I wrote earlier that Zel appeals to an Idealist morality here - and I think he does, Lion to Lion - I do think that this appeal also stirred the Badger, which is by its nature very global.

When Zel succeeds, Rezo doesn't bring down Shabranigdo from the inside. He holds him off. Endures. Just enough for Lina to do her thing.

This could be a Bird Secondary... But I think that's a Badger Secondary. In her description of the SHC archetypes, @wisteria-lodge calls the Lion/Badger "The Lynchpin", and notes how they are often the center of a wheel, and the center of events. Rezo would be an unusually non-group oriented Lynchpin - perhaps because we see him at a very desperate point - but the sheer amount of Things revolving around him certainly fits the bill. Also, the Lynchpin is a very common "Sleeper Villain" sorting, and what is Rezo if not that.

Tl;dr: the original Rezo, I think, is a Lion/Badger. Kopii-kun, on the other hand...

[sortinghatchats]

Give me numbers!

Not familiar with the sortinghatchats system? Take our quiz below— it will walk you through the system!

And once you know your sorting, check out the poll for Primary sortings below:

[lilyrealm]

im once again obsessed with SHC. the problem is.... what am i....... i think now ive narrowed down my secondary to bird... (but hold on the other day i thought it was snake. right. hm. um. no i think its bird but the snake neutral state really speaks to me. i mean thats just lion right. maybe its a model. fuck. probably) but primary..... am i a badger with a snake model? a snake with a badger model? a bird with badger/snake morality systems????? a snake with a bird model that uses a badger morality??!?! whys this so hard. well we possiblely were not meant to put ourselves in such boxes anyway but 😩😩😩

i feel like multiple times in my life ive done a bird thing where i take in info and change my morality cuz i realised its better, but also the way i feel about my morality feels very gut feeling based. i mean, did i actually adapt my moral stricture or did my feelings just change. then theres the fact that a lot of my morals center around snake/badger mentality of taking care of myself and taking care of others. i do feel the badger guilt, but i also enjoy prioritising myself. so maybe its just a snake model. or can you feel guilt with the badger model too. Oughhhh

[reds-burrow]

i get a sense that a lot of heroes think they are villains too tho lol

Agreed, and I would argue that this supports my argument, that kindness is separate from morality. There are many "heroes" who do unkind things for the "greater good." To bring this back to SHC, how we decide who is a hero or a villain is more telling than whether or not kindness is a keystone of our morality system.

[ailurocide]

one thing im a bit curious about is the topic of double-names (two characters having the same name, like ShC Ashfur and TC Ashfur) especially with what seems to be a bit of a limited naming system, like do you plan to use it as a plot point or try to steer from it completely or something different?

Since there is a very limited number of suffixes available within the Fealty, name repeats are bound to happen.

Narratively, this is addressed via ancestry. So if ThC Ashfur would be keeping his name in Ailurocide, we’d have something like (using canon examples):

Ashfur of Brindleface of Robinwing, all of ThunderClan

And then for ShadowClan:

Ashfur, foundling of ShadowClan

So two distinct cats, just one with a lineage that he would be referred to with as well.

Narratively, though, I’m going to do my best to have no names repeated throughout the series - at least for our main characters.

[painted-crow]

hi! I hope you're well. I've been thinking about my primaries and secondaries a lot lately. I'm always interested in people and I'm very good with understanding them too: it drives most of what I do, from my job to my choice of education to what I do for fun. ethics in my mind are also a bit contextual because of this: I can't really evaluate an act without knowing more about the person and situation//it's never black and white for me. I'm not an idealist, I think? (1)

I'm already giggling at this. You are such a loud Bird. "Evaluate an act" is an incredibly Bird lens. I think you might be associating Idealists with rigidity, or with certainty. Healthy Birdpris actually make a lot of space for uncertainty and for being able to say they don't have a good conclusion for whether something specific is Right yet.

And Birdpri systems are complex and built gradually over one's life precisely because there's so much nuance to be had in different situations. Not everything is going to run up against the core axioms of your system (things like "human life is inherently valuable" and "unnecessary suffering is bad").

Idealists can value people too. Birds tend to really value understanding others, it's a highly prioritized form of empathy for us, but not everyone works that way. Someone else might say, "I don't understand but I feel for you," or "I don't understand but I want to help, so you tell me what you need." Other primaries value understanding too, but for a Bird it's the first thing we go for--we feel pretty lost if we don't have some model of what's going on.

secondary-wise, much of the understanding of people thing happens sort of subconsciously--I figure out what's happening w people or how they're thinking or what they really want right 99% of the time, and it's always without really thinking about it. when it comes to other things, though, I usually work like this: I plan a thing/reach a solution for a problem, check w one person I trust about whether it works, then I execute. (2)

You've basically written me a flowchart. You lean heavily on plans and processes. Birdsec.

Having a skill down to the point where it works without you thinking about it doesn't make it not a skill; this is a Rapid-Fire Bird thing, not an Improvisational thing.

Checking your work with someone trusted doesn't make you a Badger; in this case it makes you a very meticulous Bird who's using your resources effectively.

I'm guessing at badger primary (I think just ensuring *everyone* is understood well matters the most to me? so it feels like a better guess than the rest rn), but very uncertain about secondary. feels a little gryffy sometimes but not really? I am anti-charging or plowing ahead--plans keep me sane and calm. I also read through multiple posts about shc cross-verifying traits and analyses and had to feel like I was getting nowhere before I sent this, if that says anything? thank you for this! (3)

Again, the "everyone needs to be understood" thing is a Birdpri trait. Why does everyone need to be understood? So that you and everyone else can factor the full context into your personal decision-making systems, of course! If you care about someone, you have a mental model of their needs and priorities and favorite ice cream flavors, right?

Badger language tends to be more like, "everyone needs to be cared for, their voice heard, not forgotten about--they deserve to get the help they need because they're people." But understanding is so important to Birds because a lot of our identity is often wrapped up in our systems, which we see as a thing that can be understood--and not everyone has this intricately defined worldview that they think about a lot and can explain to other people.

Plans keep you sane and calm and you've been problem-solving your Sorting by doing tons of research and cross-referencing everyone's different writing to come up with a mental model of the system to work with. Also, for all the reading you've been doing from probably a variety of different posters, I was the one you chose to write to--probably because my extremely double Bird writing voice sounds comfortingly familiar.

Welcome to the birdhouse, nonny.

[enchantingwitchycottage]

idk i just think the journey of my life can be told as a lion journey

from like 0-14 i had very black and white notions of Fairness and fairness was The Most Important Thing to me

then 14-18 i channel that into my passion for social and climate justice

at 19 i start to burn - in literally every manner except uhhhh literal. having been on SHC tumblr for a few years at this point, i watched as it happened

at 20 i enter recovery for my ED and quickly cobble up a snake primary model. all that matters is me and those most important to me (i don’t have the capacity/energy to care about anything else). it doesn’t end up working well for me

21- now i mostly drop the snake and start rebuilding my Lion by starting to listen to myself again. it makes sense that my whole primary burned, and badly - if i didn’t trust my own body how could i trust my mind?

going into the next chapter of my life, we’ve got my potential career path as an elementary school teacher, but any career i go into, it Has to be related in some way to making the world a better place

I really really like the SHC system because looking at my life in this way, i do see the core theme about Who I Am - i’m a Lion :) and that’s really important for me to know right now, as I start to rebuild myself

[wisteria-lodge]

bird primary + slightly burnt snake secondary (bird model) (burnt-out badger model)

I don't know if this is the correct place to ask this, oh well :). I recently found the SHC community and fell in love with your analysis. (Disclaimer that I may have misinterpreted some of the traits, again, very new at this.)

I am hoping you can help me sort out my secondary. My primary is very obviously a bird, no problem. I mean, I exibit certain chararistics of the others at certain times, such as strongly valuing personal loyalty and such, but I think complexity is just part of being a human and I fit really neatly into almost all of the bird stuff I've read.

and I mean... "strongly valuing personal loyalty" can just, very easily, be something that you fold into your Bird System.

But my secondary is really giving me trouble. But I keep flipping between snake with badger model or burnt badger with snake model. (With others thrown in for flavor!)

For context, I was raised in VERY emphasized badger home. And like, mostly, I agree? Hard work, grit, and consistency ARE extremely important, and while those are not the only way to ever accomplish things, they tend to be the most reliable and the most likely to give long term success. They also tend to build long lasting relationships that are supportive and grow with you over time and not just around one time/phase/stage in life. (Not that those aren't important) I want to be like that- be the reliable hard-working one. But I'm not! I am fairly lazy actually, and am constantly searching for a way around projects/problems, very often to my own detriment.

So okay. We've got some negative self-talk here.

I don't like the word "lazy" - mostly because it's just incredibly non-specific. "Lazy" can mean issues with executive functioning, it can mean I don't think xyz is important, so of course I'll cut corners. It can mean you're exhausted. It can mean you're depressed. It can mean 'if I am not working literally all the time, I'm worthless.' It can mean you're having a fun, goof-off day. See what I mean?

So what this does tell me is 1) You've got a strong Badger secondary voice in your ear, saying that This Is How It Has To Be and 2) that kind of chafes. You're about working around things, working smarter not harder, and getting out of/finishing quickly the things you don't want to do. Which is 100% completely fine! All it means is that you're probably not a Badger secondary!

And while I am very good at lying and do it to get myself out of problems semi-regularly, I feel guilty about it after (not usually in the moment) becuase of my moral system (bird primary).

I'm leaning slightly-burnt Snake here. Healthy Snakes don't usually refer to their shape-changing as "lying," so I'm keeping that in mind.

But being so snake/adaptable does have many benefits, especially in talking/working with others, and I value my ability to change to fit each person or situation. I am also often able to find unique solutions to the problems I caused myself by not doing it "right" the first time.

Definitely sounds like an improvisational secondary, and changing for the person (as opposed to changing for the situation) is very Snake.

My father has a job in the local public eye and I grew up learning how to be able to talk to anyone, act interested in anything, and have a different mask for school, vs public, vs with friends, vs just being me at home.

Sounds like you built an Actor Bird secondary model (and some of that is of course you going into Neutral.

And sometimes I feel guilty for "manipulating" people, as my moral system emphasis honesty, but just as often I pride myself on making people feel good becuase I figured out what they needed/wanted and gave it to them while making it seem like it wasn't a calculated read of the situation.

Snake. And a fairly important part of this system is that "manipulating" is a completely neutral problem-solving technique. You can manipulate people to do good, and manipulate people to do bad, just the same as you can use the Badger dependability and ability to fly under the radar to do good things, and bad things.

Overall, I am grateful for my childhood (truly I've got great parents) and I think it's super important to be able to react well to unexpected circumstances, so much so that when I finish college this spring (we'll get to that in a second) I want to go into disaster response and crisis management to help others deal with unforseen circumstances. I've worked as an EMT, and hopefully soon as a 911 dispatcher before going into formal disaster response.

I think that will suit you perfectly and (as I'm sure you probably know) that's something a Badger secondary would not be nearly as good at.

I'm very comfortable using snake methods and it makes me feel clever when I come up with an unexpected solution or pull off a tricky social maneuver-

This is a big sign this is your secondary - using it makes you feel powerful.

I just feel guilty because they hard-core fail me when it comes to big tasks I simply don't want to do- situations where the only solution is to just get it done the hard way, and trust me, I would have looked for any other options.

Yeah, that's issues with executive functioning surrounding non-preferred tasks.

I see this most often in my schoolwork. I'm a double-major senior and I am definitely burnt out from school.

Don't blame you. Sounds like you bootstrapped your way through on the family Badger secondary model, and now you're sick of using it.

I am a "gifted child," and I have always done very well in school. I've never had to work very hard at any subject, and so I never did. I always procrastinated and slid in 2 minutes before a deadline.

Very, very common story. You're using adrenaline to hack your brain to punch through executive functioning issues, we've all done it, we know it's not sustainable. Same with not having to work hard in school - you're brain's going fast, you're making connections, you're using meta-knowledge (you're using your secondary.)

The difference is that in college I started not caring about deadlines, being very late or not turning something in entirely. I got A's and F's, no in between. I am graduating, mostly due to amazing professors.

You were burnt out. This is what burnout sounds like. But you made it through, and honestly people just care if you graduated, or not.

There have been things in my life that I've worked really hard at, such as becoming an emt while in high school or my internship last summer, and I have felt really proud of that. But I don't enjoy the work for its own sake, and there have been just as many things I've cared about that I let be mediocre at best becuase I didn't want to put in the effort.

And that's fine! There are some things you care about (and you're incredibly accomplished) and there are some things you don't, and what's the problem with that?

And, some of the best feedback I recieved from that internship was that I always was working hard- and seemed positive about it. When I told them I have to "work hard to work hard" they were shocked and I felt very happy. For 2 reasons: 1, becuase I did actually put in a lot of work to work hard and it showed me that I can when I truly want to (I was starting to doubt), and 2, that they perceived me like that.

I'm guessing it also felt good because there's a large part of you that sees Badger as "the good one."

There's a slightly annoying thing about being human, that gets into the sunk-cost fallacy and things like that, that things we put a lot of effort into are inherently better, or more valuable. But it's just not true. Often the thing that's so easy it doesn't feel like work, the story or painting that just came together, *is better* than the one you slaved and sweat and bled over.

Also, I've been diagnosed with depression and anxiety, probably stemming back from before high school (it's strongly in family history, inevitable more than circumstancial), so how much of that overshadows my personality?

I mean, I think your personality comes through loud and clear. Just stop describing yourself as "lazy" okay?

To make things more complicated I love learning and picking up random bits of information, and I love trying new things. My nickname was Wikipedia in high school becuase I could always be relied upon to have some cursory knowledge about anything, though not always the helpful knowledge. (Bird vibes) I do that for the fun of it though, and it doesn't tend to be the basis of how I make decisions or react to situations.

We know you built a Bird model, so it's good that you can use it as a toy.

So what is going on here? Am I a burnt out badger who needs to not be in the school system for a while to reset and be able to dedicate myself to the things I love, and who uses snake mechanisms to cover my weak spots becuase I got good at that in childhood

You can burn out models. It's pretty common, and it's the puzzle piece you're missing here. You are a Snake. You model Badger when you have to. But because it IS hard, use it too much and it burns out and starts to hurt to use.

At which point you fall back on your Snake secondary and Actor Bird model. Don't worry. You made it through the tough times, and your new situation seems much better suited to your Snake.

Or am I a snake who strongly values badger traits but needs to figure out how to blend them? (And how do I do that?) And also go back to therapy? What's bird doing in there, anyway? I think I'm leaning option two, but like I said- I'm very flip-floppy about the whole thing.

Thank you so much- sorry it got so long. (Imagine if I were confused about my primary too!)

Hey, therapy is fantastic, but it sounds to me like you're doing pretty okay. :)

thanks @adisgracetotheforcesofevil for the submission

[blorboclaw]

my rewrite's naming system rules:

Not two siblings with the same suffix, even if they're not littermates or just "half" or adopted siblings. In big families such as BrindleRed's family (which counts the four AshFernElderTulip + Cloudtail (adopted) + the older litter Sandstorm-Ravenpaw-Chestnutblaze) the leader has better not forget the rule or they will feel offended and so will the whole clan.

Actually that unspoken rule might come from the fact if a leader forgets who's related to whom in the clan it's the sign their mind/memory is starting to fail them. It's no ground to empeachment but it is enough to alert the deputy and medicine cat in case there's a later empeachment.

"Flight" for anything that isn't something that does fly (birds, some insects, wind, leaves and flying squirrels are on thin ice) is seen as an insult. Ex: Hollowflight, Hareflight, Swiftflight... their leaders are basically implying that they give them a warrior name because they're competent but they still want to warn them that they are being too arrogant/ambitious for the leader's taste.

"Fall" on the other hand can be given to anyone except birds, insects and wind, because then it's basically wishing something that's supposed to fly free to just crash down. Also never, ever give "fall" as a suffix to a kit who is the only survivor of their litter. Birchfall? congrats Firestar mate, you just slapped him in the face and wished for him to die too.

Stem goes for cats who have a spine, like such a spine that it's worth mentionning their strong-headedness or their loyalty as qualities in the ceremony.

Seed goes for cats who are good warriors but have so much more potential.

If littermates are super-duper close, they can have "twin" suffixes, but that's not suffixes that are the same. It's for example -fang and -claw, -flight and -fall, -leap, -step and -pounce, -foot and -leg, -pelt and -fur... ex Cinderpelt and Brackenfur.

If one of the parents dies during the apprenticeship of the litter, and has only one of the kits the same sex as the dead parent, then the kit is almost 100% assured to get the parent's suffix. Ex: Redtail dies during his son's Ravenpaw's apprenticeship, and they didn't know if Brindleface's yet-to-be-born litter would count a male, so everyone knew Ravenpaw's warrior name would be Raventail.

However if both parents died before the kits became warriors, their suffixes will be avoided because it would bring bad luck, hence why Ferncloud and Ashfur are not called Fernface or Ashtail or both.

The first litter to be born in a couple will be named after ancestors to be honoured (ancestors can range from great-grandparents/former leaders to that one uncle/aunt who died without kits). The second litter, even if there are still ancestors to honor, will have original names. One litter for the past, one for the future. If there are three litters like with Dust Fern, the third they're free to chose.

Whenever a leader dies, the first litter to be born among their direct descendants will have at least one kit named after them (ex: Firestar -> Firepelt and Alderheart). If the leader has no direct descendants (ex: Leopardstar) whoever has a kit after their death can take the name.

The name worn by a leader is generally not reused while they're still alive, but Shadowclan's cats thought it might score them points with Brokenstar to give similarly derogatory prefixes to their kits, hence Tangleburr, Stumpytail, Clawface...

re two points before: actually it's very rare for two cats with the same prefix to be alive at the same time in the same clan. Notable exceptions include when a cat comes back from the dead (Graystripe from the Twolegs or Hollyleaf from the tunnels for example) and someone had been named after them, or cats who weren't born in the clan (Mousewhisker, Mousefur)

It's very rare to have classic prefixes given as suffixes (ex: Mistmouse from Windclan, Sandgorse from WC, Snowbird from ShC, Firefern and Honeyfern etc) and when it's the case it's always as a tribute (Feathertail will be renamed Willowmist after Mistyfoot)

There are names going in and out of fashion but none will just appear out of nowhere: the -blaze of Lionblaze will have been present with Chestnutblaze (Sandstorm's OC littermate) since TPB, Stemleaf and Flowerstem are not the first cats with "stem" since Bramblestar's warrior name was Bramblestem (and actually he might not even become leader), Thistleclaw and Pinestar also were named -stem... It just so happens that when Firestar joined the clan the latest fashion of names in "wind", "strike", "blaze", "storm" etc was fading and giving space to "stripe" "heart" "cloud"... "pelt" "fur" "claw" "foot" and "tail" are just a good ole reliable classics.

There are fashions in prefixes too but I haven't quite put some thought in it yet. Let's simply say that there was a lot of names in trees that were not found in the lake territories after the great journey, as memorandom to the forest, and way more "pool", "water" and "lake" after the great journey than before.

Also I'll probably use the principle of the cats pope (linked here) and the "pope" will have among their perks to decide whether a name can be used or not. Ex: "hey pope Yellowfang, can we keep using the prefix broken now that brokenstar's dead?" "nope. it's awful to name a kitten like that and also it will make his memory endure. don't" "ok." and other ex: "hey pope Littlecloud it turns out what blocked the river was a bunch of 'beavers', can we use that as a prefix?" "idk i hate that but i don't see any good reason beyond that to forbid it so yeah i guess".

There are clan-specific names. No cat from windclan will name their kit Windkit for example, because it's reserved to Windstar herself and basically sacred. Breezepelt is on thucking fin ice. If your name starts by Pine-, you're either Shadowclan or Thunderclan, sorry I don't make the rules (i do). Oakheart's parents had to ask an exemption to the pope of the time (luckily for them it was Brambleberry who was there at the birth) to be able to name him after a tree when they're Riverclan. It wouldn't be illegal to name your kit Oakkit in riverclan but it's a typical thunderclan name so having the backing of the pope herself makes it easier to shut down any rumors.

[reading-sometimes]

Equestria Girls: Legend of Everfree SHC Sorting

This is part 4 of a 4-part series. I would do the specials, but the only new characters that are introduced in them are the villains, so I feel like it would get pretty repetitive. An explanation of the SHC system by @wisteria-lodge can be found here.

Sunset: Badger Lion

Sunset's goal for this movie is helping Twilight, since Twilight has PTSD after turning into a demon in Friendship Games. Twilight's the friend who needs Sunset the most, so she's mostly focused on her.

She shows her Lion secondary by being very blunt when she's talking to Flash. She tells him to get over his crush on Princess Twilight, since she spends most of her time in Equestria.

She also has a Snake secondary model, which she's never had before. Sunset lies to Timber about why she and Twilight were in the woods in the middle of the night, and she lies to Flash about missing an earring, too. Her Snake secondary model dissapears after this movie.

Timber: Badger Bird

Timber's a Badger primary without a group (besides his sister). He's not burned, but he is really desperate for friends. Unlike Gloriosa, he wants to get away from the camp, to live in a town like everyone else. He's scared of people leaving him, because almost everyone in his life leaves him eventually.

Timber's Bird secondary is primarily to make him a good love interest for Twilight - he talks with her about how the scientific name for sapphires is sapphirus, the Latin word for blue.

Gloriosa: Double Badger

Gloriosa struggles with the Double Badger problem of overworking herself. Everything that she does is to make her campers happy, and she shows a mixture of Courier Badger and Bookeeper Badger.

Her Double Badger is incredibly obvious. The existence of the camp gift, where campers work together to build a gift for future campers, is really Double Badger-y. She pretends that there's going to be future campers, even though the camp is on the edge of bankruptcy. She emphasizes multiple times that anyone can come to her if they need anything.

She deals with the fact that her camp is about to go bankrupt by pretending that it isn't, at least around other people. She wants to make their week at camp the best week ever. It's self-imposed toxic positivity.

The pressure of helping everyone gets to her. She's very stressed, since she won't let anyone else help her. When she becomes a villian, it's well-intentioned. She wants to help her camp by gaining enough power to do so, since she believes that she has to do everything alone. She says multiple times that she wants to protect the campers. The camp is saved by contacting people who have come to the camp in the past, and setting up a fundraiser for the camp.

She shows a slight snake secondary model, since she lies about the camp fashion show being a camp tradition when they've never done it before.