#thank you for the ask anon that I definitely do not know!!!

[quantum1mmortality]

The crew & using toys on their S/O in bed please with a cherry on top??

First time writing the whole crew kinda nervous 🤭🤭 I'm not writing Swansea tho I will NOT be writing nsfw of a married man

Tw/cw; Afab!reader, winners love winning in Anyas hcs (use of the term pillow princess), jorkinit jumpscare

Not proofread

Curly

I'm actually not sure if he'd be into toys

I've literally only written for Curly so I'd say I'm a Curly expert, and I just don't think he'd be into toys

He'd use a vibrator on you every now and then, but he'd just use it to tease you and make you beg for him.

He'd probably use cock rings. I am a firm believer Curly would use cock rings. Not all the time, but if he's had a really stressful day at work, he's wanting an extra hard hitting orgasm.

Omg not a toy but APHRODISIACS!!! This man would go crazy for some aphrodisiacs, whether he's taking it or you are.

Now I wanna write a wedding night one shot with Curly and aphrodisiacs thanks a lot anon 😔😔😔 I've got enough shit to write already

Anya

I don't care what any of you say this woman is a pillow princess

YOU'D be using toys on HER

She'd also be a cryer but that's not the point

She'd have a drawer dedicated to sex toys. She's trying to get into med school, she's CONSTANTLY stressed, how else is she supposed to release some of that stress? Don't judge her.

She wouldn't be into straps or dildos, she'd be into shit that vibrates. Vibrators obviously, rose toys, anything that stimulates the clit honestly

I lied she is into dildos this woman is a sucker for a RABBIT!!! Like I said, if it vibrates, she wants it.

Her favorite combo is the rose toy/vibrator + pussy licking. She cums so fast, then gets embarrassed, then begs for more. Praise her a bunch and she'll be able to go a few more rounds

BONUS CONTENT!!; she has a Christina and Princess Albertina, no further comments

Daisuke

Oh yeah, he's using toys.

He has a tongue piercing and sometimes he'll swap it out for a bar that vibrates but y'all aren't ready for that convo

He's gonna use the basic toys, nothing we haven't gone over yet. Vibrators, rose toys, cock rings, ect. He's just trying to figure out what he likes for right now, and he likes all of them

In missionary, he'd hold either a vibrator or rose up to your clit while he fucks you. Kind of uncomfortable as a position, but if it gets you off, it's worth it to him.

Not sure if this is considered a toy but he'd be interested in sounding. He's definitely had you try it on him once or twice, and he never lasts for more than a minute 😭 poor boy

He's just trying new things out. He's new to having a committed relationship, so anything you'd be into, he'd be willing to try. He'd let you peg him if you wanted, but don't ask me to write that.

My pegging days are over

Jonathan

The kinkiest cunt that ever cursed this god forsaken ship

Toys are a must have for him. On you, not him. He only likes using them on you, because it gives him a sense of power over you.

He'd be one of those assholes that would put a bluetooth vibrator in your panties and wait till you're in public to turn it on the highest setting. Like an asshole

Jizzdaddy would have a lot of toys. He'd have one of those robotic dildo setups that like.. idk does the thrusting how the fuck do I explain this????

You guys get what I mean if you've ever been on a porn site you've seen one

Anyway, he'd have one of those setups and watch it fuck you. Ass up, head down, grasping at whatever you could since HIS sadistic ass turned it up to the highest speed.

Eventually hed get pissed off and fuck you himself, claiming that you love the toy more than you love him 😔 the allegations are true but he doesn't have to know that

He'd also use plugs on you. In public, too. He doesn't care. If you humiliate yourself, that's your fault, not his.

vibrators are used during sex, nothing new. But it's the same situation as before. Claiming you love the toy more than him, so he stops using it.

Sometimes he'll just give in though and decide he doesn't care, and wants to tease you more than anything. Highest speed it can go, or the slowest. No in-between. He'll have you begging one way or another.

Chat I hate writing rough characters someone request ooc soft Joshua hcs so I can write him like I do Curly 🙏🙏🙏

A/N; Anya makes me wanna kiss girls

[evidence-based-activism]

Okay, so Anon sent a follow-up this ask a while ago, and I've been debating whether or not I wanted to answer it. Ultimately, Anon, since you sent this prior to my creation of an ask policy, I've decided to answer. However, I'm responding in a reblog and posting a screenshot of your as below the references cut because it is 1200 words long. (Mostly due to the astounding amount of repetition.)

---

Anon sent a follow-up before I posted this:

hey, a while ago I sent you an ask in response to your response in this post https://www.tumblr.com/evidence-based-activism/757742713997262849/individual-men-arent-equally-predisposed-to?source=share it’s been a while and I was wondering if you plan to respond? I gave quite a long rebuttal and I was curious and looking forward to seeing your response. I don’t think it broke any of your rules

As stated above, I have decided to answer this. However, this is very much in the category of "things you should post on your own blog".

---

So, without further ado, my response:

"Thanks for the detailed response. I will definitely look into all the statistics again to clear up misunderstandings, but first I quickly want to address a few things."

I'm glad my response helped you! But this it not quickly!

[My quote about what men are protecting us from] ... "The very fact that you can ask these questions is a stunning testimony to the sheer effectiveness of male protection."

No Anon, it isn't. The belief that men created society is a misogynistic myth. (I will expand on this as I respond.)

"A tribal woman living on the plains of Africa or in the jungles of the Amazon would never ask such a question. Women living in 17th or 18th century colonial America would never ask such a question."

Anon, you do not speak for the women of Africa or the Amazon. To presume that women in these communities don't desire equality with and protection from men just as much as an American white woman is incredibly racist.

Why don't we actually listen to these women?

The women in Kenya who established an all-female matriarch village to escape the patriarchal society and violent men. All the other women they inspired to do the same. [1]

The Amazonian women who are fighting to protect their homelands, who explicitly state that "We women unite because we have to, because we know that together we have more power and protection on multiple levels." [2] (And there are so very many similar examples, Anon. We know that women's involvement in conservation efforts improves their outcomes [3].)

The colonial feminists who fought for women's rights and against the patriarchy [4].

Women all around the world, at every point in history, have been resisting patriarchal control. All of us have always been asking these questions.

"It is protection from both the physical threats and the stringent physical demands imposed upon the human race by a brutal natural world."

Anon, worldwide (including all the non-Western women you are trying to speak for), the leading causes of death are noncommunicable and then infectious disease [5]. This is important since the patriarchy is directly responsible for women's greater risk from both noncommunicable [6] and infectious [7, 8] disease.

In fact, the patriarchy's negative effect on women's health care is substantial and ubiquitous. Consider how male bias in clinical trials has effected out understanding of both non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments for women [9]. Or the degree to which women's health is understudied and underfunded [10].

All of these are a direct effect of patriarchal bias and discrimination against women. As such, men have not "protected" us in any meaningful sense; they have instead made our outcomes much worse.

(And notably, this is all despite the fact that, biologically speaking, women are more likely live longer and survive extreme conditions [11]. Just imagine how severe of an effect the patriarchy must exert to challenge this natural fact.)

And men do not "protect us" from physical demands. In many cases they are purposefully excluding us from physically demanding jobs [12-14]. In some others, the most physically demanding jobs are "women's work" [15].

"Men are always protecting women either directly, as is done in more primitive societies, or indirectly by building barriers against nature around them, and an infrastructure that creates a far greater life of ease. Men also maintain that infrastructure."

Protecting women directly from ... what? Again, direct physical protection is from other men. (And this applies in more than just "primitive" societies.)

And again, men have been purposefully excluding women from infrastructure jobs. Moreover, why would you assume women have been passively accepting men's protection? Particularly given the common social emphasis on women as the caretaker of the home and family?

Also, I've cited this before, but men did not build infrastructure for women; it's built for other men [16]. For a recent case study, consider the gender gap in digital infrastructure [17]. The point here is that everything is built and influenced by a male-standard. Tell me: if men were generously building infrastructure for women, why are women's needs never so much as considered in said infrastructure?

"Men are virtually all (not all but the vast majority) of the mechanical engineers, materials engineers, civil engineers, electrical engineers,  petroleum engineers, construction workers etc. Men do almost all of the most dangerous jobs on the planet."

Yet again, Anon, men are purposefully excluding women from these positions. This is not a case of men self-sacrificially volunteering for dangerous work. Women have tried and are still trying to enter these industries. Whenever they do they face structural and interpersonal discrimination and harassment. And yet we're asked to feel grateful? As if we asked for this?

"And all of it is done to sustain and enhance this infrastructure which men have created in order to insulate and protect society and their families (which is to say, women and fellow men and children) from the hazards of the natural world."

Everything I've said above applies to this as well. But in addition to all of that, I'd like to direct you to the excellent post by @vexingwomen, copied below for posterity:

The fact that men are credited with advancing civilization, rather than condemned for critically stunting its advancement after they forbade half of humanity from contributing, is an excellent example of an androcentric analysis.

Later on, I'll also be listing a small fraction of the ways women have advanced civilization despite this omnipresent suppression by men.

"That is why when there is breakdown in that infrastructure and some kind of tragedy strikes, that is the priority for men  'Women and children first'. "

And this here, this is just wrong.

A study debunks the myth that men protect "women and children first" in maritime disasters (ship wrecks). [18]

Everywhere in the world, women and girls are disproportionately affected by disasters. Women are more likely to die in natural disasters, particularly in more patriarchal areas. Everywhere, "sexual assaults, physical abuse and human trafficking increase after a disaster". [19]

The UN has confirmed this, finding violence against women, particularly sexual violence, increases following disasters [20].

As has the World Bank [21] and the Inter-Agency Standing Committee [22].

Further, this study [23] concluded that eliminating the male head-of-household model is "crucial to speeding up overall household recovery" from natural disasters.

We also shouldn't forget that man-made disasters (e.g., war) truly are man-made [24, 25]

And you know that whole "men make infrastructure" and "men exclude women" things? Well it turns out it's a woman – Elizabeth Hausler – who has helped pioneer and advocate for disaster resilient infrastructure [26, 27].

"Men routinely protect women from rain, sleet, snow, starvation, hypothermia and animal attacks. When the virtually entirely male-created infrastructure of society is working well, the vast majority of women like you can go about their lives oblivious to the work being done behind the scenes to make their lives as comfortable and safe as they are."

Please see all of the above. And also consider the fact that women around the world do substantially – three times – more unpaid care work than men [28-30]. Imagine if women all stopped caring for children and doing housework and growing food and helping elders. This work is truly "behind the scenes" (i.e., unpaid, ignored, unpraised) and men are certainly oblivious (or at least unappreciative) of it. (They're comfortable with this status quo too.)

And this division has always been of benefit to men; granting them the time, space, and peace of mind to do so many of the things you praise them for.

"Once in the wild, or when society starts to break down, women go right back to urgently requiring men to perform these acts for them and their children. It is the same story now as it was a hundred thousand years ago."

See everything in the disaster section. When society breaks down, women receive violence not protection from men. When women are integrated into disaster response and recovery, the outcomes are much better for everyone. We don't "urgently require men" in these situations. Statistically speaking, we would be better off without them.

"'Men created the need for protection'… some men definitely do, but the amount of protection they have afforded us both individually and structurally far outweighs the harm that these men do. It may be hard to see, but as I explained above this just illustrates how effective so much of the protection is that we can take it for granted."

What protection Anon? We've established that men and the patriarchy are responsible for the vast majority of violence against women, for women's poorer outcomes in natural disasters, for the creation of man-made disasters, and for women's poorer outcomes in communicable and non-communicable diseases (the leading cause of death worldwide).

We've also seen that women's integration into disaster response/preparation and medical work/research vastly improves everyone's outcomes.

So where exactly is the protection? What are men doing that women can not, do not, or could not?

(How many more women would have survived without the men to create these problems in the first place?)

"I don’t say this to downplay the suffering of people who suffer at the hands of men, and I hope that comes across. "

I don't think you're downplaying the suffering you acknowledge. I think you are vastly underestimating the amount of suffering that comes at the hands of men and vastly overestimating the amount of support/protection they provide.

"'Men protect women from other men and then expect us to be grateful': Honestly..yes, if a man protects a woman from a violent or harmful man then it’s perfectly reasonable to expect some level of gratitude.

You appear to be interpreting this statement as if I meant it for individuals when I am talking about classes (hence the plurals).

It's reasonable for any individual person (of either sex) to be grateful for protection from another person (of either sex).

It is not reasonable to expect women (as a class) to be grateful to men (as a class) for creating the very issues they "protect" us from.

"Of course that doesn’t mean women should be subservient to men or whatever."

Great, on this we agree.

"If anyone protects anyone then it’s fair to expect gratitude."

Sure, as I said above. I should note, however, that many men use this expectation of gratitude to cover for their own behavior. Other women have said it better than me, but as an example, men will use other men's violence to discourage their wives/girlfriends from insisting on an equal share of housework. Women will feel grateful he's a "good one" and ignore more subtle sexist slights.

Moreover, any protection (from anyone) is not altruistic if they expect something (e.g., sex, children, emotional labor) in return. And if they're using an implied threat of force (or abandonment to some outside threat) then it's extortion and coercion. Much of men's "protection" fails in one or both of these categories.

"You understand that individual men are not equally predisposed to abusing women, yes."

As described in the original post.

"Then you understand that a protective man and a harmful man are not part of the same entity..."

Anon, they are both still men. This is, I think, another misunderstanding of the unit of analysis. We are talking about men and women as a class.

This is no more useful a claim than the "not all men" sentiment.

"...and aren’t equally as guilty for the violent man’s actions?"

Of course an individual man who has not committed any violent acts is not guilty for another man's violent acts. But you are again talking about individuals instead of classes.

Moreover, as I've discussed in the past there are a lot of violent men. And, unfortunately, there usually isn't a way to know if any particular man has been or will be violent until after it happens.

"[my Mozart quote] I don’t see how it’s hilarious."

It's hilarious because there has been a female Mozart. Not just a female contemporary who was equally as skilled (although there are many of those as well) but a literal female Mozart. An equally skilled female composer named Mozart.

"The point of Paglia’s quote is to illustrate the general differences between the sexes using historical icons to do so. The work is more poetic rather than a statistics sheet."

And it's wrong. It isn't accurate. The poetry of the line is irrelevant if it's based on falsehoods.*

(*A note: I actually really like poetry, and am not saying fictional poetry or even inaccurate poetry is inherently bad. I am purely saying that, when discussing historical differences between men and women, the construction of the phrase is irrelevant if the history is inaccurate.)

"As she says in another passage 'genius will overcome'."

The belief that women could escape patriarchal domination if they just tried hard enough (or, worse, were just inherently good enough) is incredibly misogynistic. Further, there is no proof that such a sentiment is accurate.

"Mozart’s sister was nowhere near as influential or subversive as he, this is a myth. the fact you have to search for these contemporaries is  simply illustrating the wider point"

Yeah, and that wider point is that men have erased women from history. Women throughout history have been forced (either directly or indirectly through social pressure) to sacrifice their careers for their families. Nannerl Mozart herself was forced to give up her musical career by her family [31].

Even beyond preemptive suppression, women's contributions have been erased and stolen throughout history. This is a ubiquitous phenomenon, so much so that it's been named the "Matilda Effect" for the sciences [32]. A favored example is of Rosalind Franklin, who discovered the structure of DNA, a discovery that was stolen by Watson and Crick who later won a Nobel prize for the work [33]. There are innumerable examples of this (and not just in the sciences); I won't be listing them all here because this post is already extremely long. Just search for "historical women in [field]" and you will get dozens of results (or more).

Between women's social suppression, men's intentional erasure, and society's emphasis on male-centric education it's no surprise that men appear to be the primary creators. But that doesn't make it true.

"Of course there have been SOME female serial killers, but no where near as many men, and lol, no “Jack the rippers” who become urban legends for their brutality and depravity."

I mean ... this is really not a favorable point for your argument. Further, Jack the Ripper was really just a standard serial killer. (He killed five prostitutes and then mutilated them postmortem. This is pretty much a standard serial-killer typology.) The cultural obsession with him is entirely manufactured.

It's also likely that the same historical-erasure has occurred for the (admittedly few) female serial killers that have existed.

"You’re missing the point by a wide margin but I admit that the looseness of the quote is partly to blame."

I haven't missed the point, I just contest the accuracy of the statement.

"[someone else's comment] Not once did I say 'men are more human', and that is not even implied anywhere. I can’t believe I have to say this. This is just this person making things up. Recognising the ways men have contributed to the world doesn’t mean I think they’re more human somehow."

Your original ask indicates you believe that men can achieve a wider range of human experience/emotion, which implies that you believe they (have the ability to be) more human. This sort of rhetoric is often used to dehumanize out-groups.

And maybe this wasn't your intention! In which case, that's great! But you should be aware of the way your rhetoric can be interpreted and abused.

"I’ll also leave you with the full quote as I think it touches on a lot of what I’m trying to get across. I don’t agree with everything said here to be frank but as I said before this is more poetic literature meant to make a point (that we should appreciate men’s contributions as well as their failures) than a data sheet. "

I've already explained why poetic literature – in this context – is irrelevant.

Now I'd like to take a detour into the originator of the quote Camille Paglia.

This woman, despite her claims, is not a feminist. The following quote should illustrate that on its own. But in addition to that, she has overtly supported pedophilia and attempted to associate them with the gay community [34]. She also supported "pornography, child pornography, snuff films" [35].

Now, she has since retracted those views – to an extent, and I think it's important to allow people room to grow and admit they were wrong. But the book you are quoting to me, is where she expresses these views. I would no more accept the views of a pro-pedophilia, pro-pornography, anti-feminist on woman, than I would accept the views of a white-supremacist on racial minorities. Indeed, I regard anyone who would accept such views with suspicion.

Finally, I'll address the quote from Paglia ("Camille Paglia, "Sexual Personae" 1990").

Her entire quote is profoundly anti-feminist. I've also addressed almost all of it in the above sections. So, most of this will be pointing you to the rest of the post. But I'll also have a few specific notes.

"Men have sacrificed and crippled themselves physically and emotionally to feed, house, and protect women and children. "

See above, men have not functionally protected us. Nor is there evidence that they have "crippled themselves" in any such pursuit.

"None of their pain or achievement is registered in feminist rhetoric, which portrays men only as oppressive and callous exploiters."

Men oppress women. This is the basis for feminist rhetoric because feminism is about freeing women from men's oppression. Would you expect a African-American advocacy group to celebrate European-American's great accomplishments? (Worse, would you implore them to be grateful?) What about Indigenous peoples? Disabled people? Gay people?

"Let us stop being small-minded about men and freely acknowledge what treasures their obsessiveness has poured into culture."

Acknowledging the pandemic of male violence against women (among all the innumerable other ways men oppress women) is not small-minded. It's truthful.

See above sections about obsessiveness.

"We could make an epic catalog of male achievements, from paved roads, indoor plumbing and washing machines, to eyeglasses, antibiotics and disposable diapers."

This here, this is a bad sign about the accuracy of her research.

We don't know who invented paved roads or indoor plumbing, since the original iterations were both invented thousands of years ago [36, 37]. To assume it was a man is sexist and unsupported.

A woman – Josephine Cochran – invented the washing machine [38].

Antibiotics are attributed to man, but as predicted by the Matilda Effect, many women were crucial to the discovery, development, and production of the drugs [39].

A woman – Marion Donovan – invented disposable diapers [40].

"We enjoy safe, fresh milk and meat, and vegetables and tropical fruits heaped in snowbound cities."

Not sure what she's getting at here, since women are responsible for half of the world’s food production [41]. (And 60-80% in developing countries.) For transportation of food, see the above sections about men's purposeful exclusion of women.

"When I cross the George Washington Bridge or any of America’s great bridges, I think: men have done this. Construction is a sublime male poetry."

Again, see men's purposeful exclusion of women. But also, even despite that, there have still been important female innovators in transportation [42]. In fact, one of the – arguably most famous – "great American bridge", the Brooklyn bridge was overseen by a woman, Emily Roebling.

We should also note that for the brief moment (in the USA) when men were no longer able to exclude women from these careers (World War II), women joined and did well [43]. (Remember, "Rosie the Riveter"?)

"When I see a giant crane passing on a flatbed truck, I pause in awe and reverence as one would for a church procession."

This is just very strange! But, again, see everything I wrote above.

"What power of conception, what grandiosity: these cranes tie us to ancient Egypt, where monumental architecture was first imagined and achieved."

Again, no. The first monumental architecture was probably Göbekli Tepe temple in southeast Turkey [44]. And there's a few dozen other examples that all predate the pyramids of Egypt. I won't list them here, but you can find them easily by searching "monumental architecture older than the pyramids." (Again, this is not a good sign for her research skills.)

There's also, again, no reason to assume these structures were the solely the domain of men. There's possible evidence to the contrary, as the earliest buildings may have been built by (at least mostly) egalitarian societies [45].

"A contemporary woman clapping on a hard hat merely enters a conceptual system invented by men. If civilization had been left in female hands, we would still be living in grass huts."

All the criticisms from above apply. Again, we have no concrete evidence that women were not involved in early architecture. We do have proof that women, when not impeded by men, can and will do just as well as a man. As such, we have no reason to believe civilization in "female hands" would not advance as well as civilization in "male hands".

Also, this is an incredibly misogynistic statement!!

"Male conspiracy cannot explain all female failures."

I am genuinely amazed that this woman considers herself a feminist. Suppression and oppression of women by men all across the world does not constitute "female failure". The fact that we have achieved outstanding accomplishments in spite of their interference is a testament to women's ability.

"I am convinced that, even without restrictions, there still would have been no female Pascal, Milton, or Kant."

Pascal was a mathematician/scientist, so here allow me to redirect you to the Matilda Effect and this starter list [46] of female mathematician/scientists. Also try searching for "historical female mathematicians", there will dozens and dozens of examples.

I'm guessing she means John Milton? He was an author, so here's an article [47] about how women are responsible for the birth of language. And another article [48] about the earliest known author – a woman from Mesopotamia. Again, try searching "historical female author" or "historical female poet"; there are innumerable examples.

Kant was a philosopher, so have an article about female philosophers being written out of history [49]. Search for "historical female philosopher" for examples of those who remain. Consider how many have been successfully erased.

And now, for fun:

Women invented agriculture [50]

Women domesticated dogs [51]

Women created and are central to the textile industry [52]

Women created these beautiful examples of architecture [53]

Women, despite everything, greatly impacted transportation and mobility [54] including inventing traffic lanes, car heaters, the foundation for Bluetooth, GPS, and Wi-Fi, windshield wipers, turn signals, and other safety features/initiatives.

Women made even more safety inventions [55] including fire extinguishers, the fire escape, the life raft, the material used in bulletproof vests, and more

Women have always been involved in, and sometimes central to, health care [56, 57]

Women were the original midwives and child carers; they are still almost all midwives and the majority of child carers [58, 59, 28-30]

And more! So, so much more!

Pick a field Anon, search "women in [field]" and you will find examples. Remember the Matilda Effect and consider how many more you'll never know.

"Genius is not checked by social obstacles; it will overcome."

This is not just discriminatory towards women but racial minorities, the poor, the disabled, everyone who has face such obstacles. You cannot "overcome" poverty through force of will. You cannot "overcome" sex trafficking or religious abuse or domestic violence or slavery. You cannot "overcome" deprivation of necessities. Einstein and Mozart and Kant were not doing their own laundry or cooking their own meals. Even today, with all the efficiency technological advances have brought, there are still classes of people relegated to "menial" labor. Yes, people born to these conditions can be so prodigious – and supported by others – that they escape their circumstances. But what about those without support? Or those who could have done great things, but were forced – for whatever reason – to abandon such efforts. These are not failures of will power, they're tragedies of circumstance.

"What feminism calls patriarchy is simply civilisation, an abstract system designed by men but augmented and now co-owned by women."

This is so! incredibly! misogynistic!

Men were not the sole designers (see above) the assumption of "co-ownership" implies a state of sociopolitical equality that doesn't exist. The belief that patriarchy is inherent to civilization is a fatalistic anti-feminist assumption without basis in reality.

Finally, you linked a video: “The hatred of women”:

This is a sexist video overlaid by a sexist song. Men's self-pitying lament occur "having" to do dangerous jobs when they prevent women from doing them, over dying in wars they start, and the activism of women combating the problems they have created is tasteless, sexist, and pointless.

As another woman has said: the patriarchy backfiring on men, is not women's responsibility.

Conclusion

I hope this helps clear everything up, Anon. I also hope the audience gets use out of this research (even if it is not as complete as I prefer).

Anon, if you are female, I implore you not to rely on men for protection. More likely than not, it will end very poorly for you. And if you are male, then stop expecting women/feminists to solve men's male-manufactured problems. Feminism is – and should be – for and by women.

References under the cut:

The Village without Men - Umoja, Kenya. | Hadithi Africa. 4 Feb. 2019, https://hadithi.africa/the-village-without-men-umoja-kenya/.

“Indigenous Women Demand More Protection in Decades-Long Fight for Amazon Homelands.” Amnesty International, 5 Aug. 2020, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/impact/2020/08/indigenous-women-demand-more-protection-in-decades-long-fight-for-amazon-homelands/.

Leisher, Craig, et al. “Does the Gender Composition of Forest and Fishery Management Groups Affect Resource Governance and Conservation Outcomes? A Systematic Map.” Environmental Evidence, vol. 5, no. 1, Mar. 2016, p. 6. BioMed Central, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-016-0057-8.

“Timeline: Women’s Rights in the Early Republic.” National Women’s History Museum, 29 Nov. 2018, https://www.womenshistory.org/exhibits/timeline-womens-rights-early-republic.

Dattani, Saloni, et al. “Causes of Death.” Our World in Data, Dec. 2023. ourworldindata.org, https://ourworldindata.org/causes-of-death.

“Women and NCDs.” NCD Alliance, 7 Mar. 2011, https://ncdalliance.org/why-ncds/ncds-and-sustainable-development/women-and-ncds.

Gerberding, Julie L. “Women and Infectious Diseases.” Emerging Infectious Diseases, vol. 10, no. 11, Nov. 2004, p. 1965. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov, https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1011.040800.

Pandemics Are Not Gender-Neutral, Gender Analysis Can Improve Response to Disease Outbreaks. UNIDIR. 6 Nov. 2020, https://unidir.org/pandemics-are-not-gender-neutral-gender-analysis-can-improve-response-to-disease-outbreaks/.

Jackson, Gabrielle. “The Female Problem: How Male Bias in Medical Trials Ruined Women’s Health.” The Guardian, 13 Nov. 2019. The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/nov/13/the-female-problem-male-bias-in-medical-trials.

Smith, Kerri. Women’s Health Research Lacks Funding – These Charts Show How. Nature, 3 May 2023, https://www.nature.com/immersive/d41586-023-01475-2/index.html.

Zarulli, Virginia, et al. “Women Live Longer than Men Even during Severe Famines and Epidemics.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 115, no. 4, Jan. 2018. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1701535115.

Zhavoronkova, Marina, et al. Occupational Segregation in America. Center for American Progress, 29 Mar. 2022.

Durana, Alieza, et al. “Sexual Harassment: A Severe and Pervasive Problem.” New America, 26 Sept. 2018, http://newamerica.org/better-life-lab/reports/sexual-harassment-severe-and-pervasive-problem/. Parker, Kim. “Women in Majority-Male Workplaces Report Higher Rates of Gender Discrimination.” Pew Research Center, 7 Mar. 2018, https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2018/03/07/women-in-majority-male-workplaces-report-higher-rates-of-gender-discrimination/.

Simons, N. M. (1987). The female worker and physically demanding work. AAOHN journal, 35(5), 235-238.

Graham, J. P., Hirai, M., & Kim, S. S. (2016). An analysis of water collection labor among women and children in 24 sub-Saharan African countries. PloS one, 11(6), e0155981.

Perez, C. C. (2019). Invisible women: Data bias in a world designed for men. Abrams.

Digital public infrastructure – blessing or curse for women and girls? (2024, March 5). World Economic Forum.

Elinder, M., & Erixson, O. (2012). Gender, social norms, and survival in maritime disasters. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(33), 13220-13224.

Women and girls in disasters. (n.d.). Center for Disaster Philanthropy. Retrieved from https://disasterphilanthropy.org/resources/women-and-girls-in-disasters/

Disasters, crises and violence against women: Evidence from big data analysis. (2023, June 15). UN Women Data Hub. https://data.unwomen.org/publications/disasters-crises-and-violence-against-women-evidence-big-data-analysis

DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT BRIEF. (2015). The World Bank. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/937751468329371031/pdf/929670REVISED00ent0Brief0APRIL02015.pdf

Inter-Agency Standing Committee. 2015. Guidelines for Integrating Gender-Based Violence Interventions in Humanitarian Action: Reducing risk, promoting resilience and aiding recovery.

Villarreal, M., & Meyer, M. A. (2020). Women's experiences across disasters: A study of two towns in Texas, United States. Disasters, 44(2), 285-306.

Masculinity and war–let’s talk about it more. (2018, March 15). Humanitarian Law & Policy Blog. https://blogs.icrc.org/law-and-policy/2018/03/15/masculinity-and-war-let-s-talk-about-it-more/

Micheletti, A. J. C., Ruxton, G. D., & Gardner, A. (2018). Why war is a man’s game. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 285(1884), 20180975. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2018.0975

Ashoka. (2020, April 23). Build change: Rethinking housing after the crisis. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashoka/2020/04/23/build-change-rethinking-housing-after-the-crisis/

Build change | every home is disaster-resilient. (2024). https://buildchange.org

Seedat, S., & Rondon, M. (2021). Women’s wellbeing and the burden of unpaid work. BMJ, n1972. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1972

Hanna, T., Meisel, C., Moyer, J., Azcona, G., Bhatt, A., & Valero, S. D. (2020.) FORECASTING TIME SPENT IN UNPAID CARE AND DOMESTIC WORK. UN Women.

Not all gaps are created equal: The true value of care work. (2022, May 25). Oxfam International. https://www.oxfam.org/en/not-all-gaps-are-created-equal-true-value-care-work

Gordan, J. (2019, May 30). The quiet genius of maria anna mozart . All About History | All About History Magazine. http://www.historyanswers.co.uk/people-politics/the-quiet-genius-of-maria-anna-mozart/

Rossiter, M. W. (1993). The matthew matilda effect in science. Social Studies of Science, 23(2), 325–341. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631293023002004

Magazine, S., & Sullivan, W. (n.d.). What we’re still learning about rosalind franklin’s unheralded brilliance. Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved November 3, 2024, from https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/what-were-still-learning-about-rosalind-franklins-unheralded-brilliance-180982058/

Stanley, T. (2014, March 5). Allen Ginsberg, Camille Paglia, and the literary champions of paedophilia. The Telegraph. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20140306014809/http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100261734/allen-ginsberg-camille-paglia-and-the-literary-champions-of-paedophilia/

Duffy/Philadelphia, M. (1992, January 13). The bete noire of feminism: Camille paglia. TIME. https://time.com/archive/6719385/the-bete-noire-of-feminism-camille-paglia/

Longfellow, R. (2023, June 30). Building roads: Back in time. U.S. Department of Transportation. https://highways.dot.gov/highway-history/general-highway-history/back-time/building-roads

Dennemeyer – The IP Group. (2021, February 12). Everyday IP — Flushing out the facts: When was indoor plumbing invented? Lexology. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx

Magazine, S., & Eschner, K. (n.d.). This time-saving patent paved the way for the modern dishwasher. Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved November 3, 2024, from https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/time-saving-patent-paved-way-modern-dishwasher-180967656/

Women in the history of antimicrobial development. (2024, March 15). ASM.Org. https://asm.org:443/Articles/2024/March/Women-in-the-History-of-Antimicrobial-Development

Marion donovan. (n.d.). MIT. https://lemelson.mit.edu/resources/marion-donovan

U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Fact Sheet: Food Security and Gender. https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pnadr706.pdf

Hecox, D. (2020). Female innovators in transportation: Yesterday and today. U.S. Department of Transportation. https://highways.dot.gov/public-roads/spring-2020/female-innovators-transportation-yesterday-and-today

(Citation list forced to start over because of character limit, add 42 to each of the below numbers.)

Women of the wwii workforce: Photos show the real‑life rosie the riveters. (2023, September 15). HISTORY. https://www.history.com/news/women-world-war-ii-factories-photos

Curry, Andrew. “Gobekli Tepe: The World’s First Temple?” Smithsonian Magazine, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/gobekli-tepe-the-worlds-first-temple-83613665/.

Hirst, K. (2019). What are the characteristics of ancient monumental architecture? ThoughtCo. https://www.thoughtco.com/ancient-monumental-architecture-types-167225

Magazine, S., & Dominus, S. (2019). Women scientists were written out of history. It’s margaret rossiter’s lifelong mission to fix that. Smithsonian Magazine. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/unheralded-women-scientists-finally-getting-their-due-180973082/

Poole, S. (2021, August 28). Passing the ‘chimp test’: How women were key to the birth of language. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/aug/28/passing-the-chimp-test-how-neanderthals-and-women-helped-create-language

The earliest known author was a woman from mesopotamia. (2023, June 16). HISTORY. https://www.history.com/news/the-earliest-known-author-was-a-woman-from-mesopotamia

Hinz, A. (2023, March 2). The forgotten half of history: Why women philosophers matter. De Gruyter Conversations. https://blog.degruyter.com/the-forgotten-half-of-history-why-women-philosophers-matter/

Oregon State University. (2021). The origins of agriculture. In History and science of cultivated plants. https://open.oregonstate.education/cultivatedplants/chapter/agriculture/

Chambers, J., Quinlan, M. B., Evans, A., & Quinlan, R. J. (2020). Dog-human coevolution: Cross-cultural analysis of multiple hypotheses. Journal of Ethnobiology, 40(4), 414–433. https://doi.org/10.2993/0278-0771-40.4.414

Press, S. (2023, March 8). Unraveling the thread: Why women are the backbone of the textile industry. Smartex. https://www.smartex.ai/post/why-women-are-the-backbone-of-the-textile-industry

Magazine, S., & Billock, J. (n.d.). Six wonders built by pioneering women architects. Smithsonian Magazine. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/six-wonders-built-pioneering-women-architects-180977099/

Women of transportation and how they shaped mobility. (n.d.). https://www.fluidtruck.com/blog/revolutionary-women-of-transportation-and-how-they-shaped-mobility

Article | Queens of safety inventions. (n.d.). Fleming. https://fleming.events/articles/queens-of-safety-inventions/

Wynn, R. (2000). Saints and sinners: Women and the practice of medicine throughout the ages. JAMA, 283(5), 668–669. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.283.5.668-JMS0202-4-1

A history of women in healthcare. (2024, March 25). Prolink. https://prolinkworks.com/perspectives/history-of-women-in-healthcare

ICM. (2022, January 30). The origins of midwifery. International Confederation of Midwives. https://internationalmidwives.org/the-origins-of-midwifery/

State of the World’s Midwifery 2021. (2021). International Confederation of Midwives. https://internationalmidwives.org/resources/state-of-the-worlds-midwifery-2021/

Screenshots of Anon's ask:

Individual men aren't equally predisposed to committing rape. men are approximately 49% of the population and commit 80% of violent crime. The correlation to testosterone to physical aggression is indisputable -- this correlation between masculinization and aggression exists even in women.

These antisocial behaviors are the subverted, shadow aspect to the more predominant masculine (even in masculine women) urge to provide and protect, which entails necessary and selective objectification and aggression.

“There is no female Mozart because there is no female Jack the Ripper.” is what Camille Paglia said. Genius, she argues, takes obsession, which produces good and bad talents and skills. Women fall in the middle of the IQ spectrum and men on the ends.

Social forces are certainly at play, but I want to stay focused. trauma or other external factors may serve to explain, but not excuse behavior. Feminine crime is more likely to be focused on family -- children, partners, elders, and others in the immediate family.

https://time.com/2921491/hope-solo-women-violence/

Women are at least equally as likely as men to initiate DV. 40% of victims in a DV study in America were men. Women are at least as likely as men to abuse their children and are the perpetrators in at least half of child maltreatment cases. Lesbian couples also have the highest rate of DV -- 44%, compared to 35% of straight women and 26% of gay men.

Anecdotally speaking, I was abused physically and psychologically by my mother, who was abused physically and psychologically by both her parents. I was also SA'd by a man. Both sexes have their share of degenerates who harm others. Whether their personalities or social experiences are masculine, feminine, or somewhere in between likely has an effect on how they express their violence. Everyone who commits a crime against another should be held accountable, I just disagree with the dichotomy that men are assumed to be perps and women are assumed to be victims.

I'm going to respond to this in parts.

"Individual men aren't equally predisposed to committing rape."

No, no one is ever equally predisposed to anything since that would require the confluence of innumerable, mostly unknown, factors. I have never made this claim; I don't of anyone who has ever made this claim.

"Men are approximately 49% of the population and commit 80% of violent crime."

This technically true in the USA [1]. However, it also leaves out the fact that men account for closer to 90% of homicide offenders in the USA and closer to 95% of homicides worldwide [2]. And those statistics don't even consider the fact that many female homicide offenders were acting in self defense. Men also account for closer to 90-95% of all sex offenders [3].

That is to say, a greater proportion of women's offenses are "simple assault" than men's [4]. (Simple assault is generally defined as either a threat of physical harm without any actual harm or minor acts of assault without resulting injury like slapping someone, grabbing their arm, or spitting on them.)

All in all, men commit the vast majority of violent crime and an even larger proportion of serious violent crime.

"The correlation to testosterone to physical aggression is indisputable -- this correlation between masculinization and aggression exists even in women."

No, no it is not, and no it does not.

This meta-analysis [5] found a correlation of 0.08 between testosterone and aggression. To be clear, a correlation score can range from -1 to +1, with -1 indicating a perfect negative correlation, +1 indicating a perfect positive correlation, and 0 indicating no correlation. A correlation of 0.08 is an extremely weak correlation.

Another, more recent, meta-analysis [6] found a 0.05 correlation between aggression and testosterone and no statistically significant causal effect of testosterone on aggression. Changes in testosterone were weakly correlated with aggression (0.16) and this was only in men. Importantly, this result may have been influenced by publication bias (see the study for details). Again, to be clear, they found no evidence of a causal connection between testosterone and aggression.

The lack causal connection is important, as some research as presented in this review [7] and meta-analysis [8], suggests that behavior/external events (like winning a competition) can increase testosterone. This raises an important question: can acting/being aggressive independently raise testosterone? If so, (and it does appear likely) then men who choose to act aggressive may be raising their testosterone levels; when recorded in a correlational format this results in the positive (albeit weak) correlation discussed above.

Here's some other, single study results:

In women, performing (acting out) a performance of power, whether in a traditionally masculine or feminine way, increased their level of testosterone [9]

In men, testosterone increases both pro-social and anti-social "status enhancing" behaviors [10]

Testosterone is associated with both "socially dominant [note: not necessarily aggressive] behavior among high-status persons, but strategic submission to seniority among lower-status persons" in men [11]

Testosterone is associated with greater pro-social behavior in women [12]

In an animal (male gerbil) model, testosterone caused prosocial behavior depending on "current social context" [13]

All in all, the correlation between testosterone and aggression is (1) not indisputable, (2) extremely weak, and (3) doesn't appear to apply to women.

"These antisocial behaviors are the subverted, shadow aspect to the more predominant masculine (even in masculine women) urge to provide and protect, which entails necessary and selective objectification and aggression."

Anon ... no. First of all, you appear to be treating "masculine" behavior as if it is biologically innate - for which there is no evidence - rather than socially determined.

You act as if women have not been "providing" since women existed. As if women haven't been involved in growing and domesticating plants and animals, haven't been taking care of children, haven't been growing and giving birth to all the children in history. Even the traditional "feminine" role emphasizes "providing" and "nurturing" the family.

I have the exact same comments for "protect", but more importantly: protect from what anon? From the weather? Bears? Disease? No. It's men. Men protect women from other men and then expect us to be grateful, as if it isn't men who have created the need for protection.

Beyond all that: even if the "masculine urge to provide and protect" were a real thing (and not something women have always been involved in), it still would not necessitate the "selective objectification and aggression". This argument isn't even logical ... why would "providing" need objectification? If there were no aggression what would be left to protect?

"There is no female Mozart ... "

Absolutely hilarious example to choose, anon. Meet, the female Mozart: Maria Anna “Nannerl” Mozart (his sister) [14].

And here's some other female contemporaries of Mozart [15]. I suggest Google as a resource to find more.

"...because there is no female Jack the Ripper."

While it is true that the number of male serial killers does outnumber female serial killers (and the disparity is even wider for those who kill specifically for sadism), there have, in fact, been some.

"Genius, she argues, takes obsession, which produces good and bad talents and skills. Women fall in the middle of the IQ spectrum and men on the ends."

I find the argument that obsession -> genius to be very concerning, and don't expect there are any sources on that. In particular, serial killer IQs tend to follow the same range as non-serial killers (source in last linked post).

And no, the idea that women fall in the middle of the IQ spectrum is not supported by high quality evidence.

This extensive multi-country review [16] on math performance found that the "variance ratio" (the measure for what you're describing) varies widely between countries and is related to social inequality. This suggests the differences in variance are a result of environmental not innate differences.

This longitudinal study [17] claims to find differences in girl's and boy's IQ scores, but the differences found are within the margin of error of the test. This means that a sex difference is unlikely to exist, and is, at the very least, not reliably measurable. It also suggests that any difference in the variance of IQ scores, is very small. (And see above for possible alternative explanations of this difference.)

"Social forces are certainly at play"

Yes, as indicated above.

"but I want to stay focused."

Focused on what??

"trauma or other external factors may serve to explain, but not excuse behavior."

Agreed (mostly). They may serve as a partial explanation yes, but people can experience trauma or other hardships without engaging in violence.

"Feminine crime is more likely to be focused on family -- children, partners, elders, and others in the immediate family." + [The link]

Correct, most crime by women is aimed at people they know. See above posts (when I spoke about homicide) for further discussion on this.

The link is an anecdotal source on this topic, again, refer to my earlier discussions.

"Women are at least equally as likely as men to initiate DV. 40% of victims in a DV study in America were men. Women are at least as likely as men to abuse their children and are the perpetrators in at least half of child maltreatment cases."

This is completely false. The idea that women perpetrate domestic violence or child abuse at similar rates as men, is a misogynistic myth.

See this post for an explanation. Also, this source [18] discusses the topic of women and domestic violence perpetration; I plan to eventually make a post on this topic, but in the meantime that source is an excellent place to start.

"Lesbian couples also have the highest rate of DV -- 44%, compared to 35% of straight women and 26% of gay men."

This is also a myth. A misogynistic and homophobic myth.

I'm not sure where you got those specific numbers, but I believe the origin of the myth started in the one of the CDC's reports on "Victimization by Sexual Identity" [19]. See this post for an explanation on why you shouldn't use this data to try and estimate perpetration. (Short version: it isn't weighted to be representative of the perpetrator population.) For the intimate partner violence portion in particular, it shares the same issues I describe in my post debunking the last two myths (i.e., reliance on the CTS and issues there within.)

More importantly, they don't report on the sex of the perpetrator for domestic violence, so we also have no idea if the lifetime prevalence rate of domestic violence is a result of prior relationships with a man. Data on other forms of victimization support the possibility, with 73% of lesbian victims reporting only male perpetrators of any contact sexual violence and 90% of lesbian victims reporting only male perpetrators of rape. In addition, 52% of lesbian victims report only male perpetrators of stalking.

This BJS report "Violent Victimization by Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, 2017–2020" [20] shows a similar rate of intimate partner violence for homosexual and heterosexual individuals. Importantly, however, this combines male and female homosexual individuals into one category, so we don't know the specific rate for female homosexuals.

"Anecdotally speaking, I was abused physically and psychologically by my mother, who was abused physically and psychologically by both her parents. I was also SA'd by a man."

This is terrible, and I hope you are safe and able to heal.

"Both sexes have their share of degenerates who harm others."

Sure, I mentioned the female serial killers. Notably, however, if you take a random sample of "degenerates who harm others" the vast majority are men.

"Whether their personalities or social experiences are masculine, feminine, or somewhere in between likely has an effect on how they express their violence."

I do not know what you mean by this. Socialization definitely plays a significant role in why men are so much more violent than women, but "feminine" men can and have been as violent as "masculine" men and "masculine" women have been as non-violent as "feminine" women.

"Everyone who commits a crime against another should be held accountable"

Yes.

"I just disagree with the dichotomy that men are assumed to be perps and women are assumed to be victims."

Anon, you started this ask by acknowledging that men commit 80% of violent crime (and I clarified that men commit 90+% of serious violent crime). This disparity is significant enough that it is perfectly reasonable to treat violent crime as a gendered phenomenon.

There are always exceptions and outliers. The existence of these cases does not invalidate the trend, nor should they deter the generalizations needed for meaningful class analysis.

Now, if you want to advocate against violence in general, draw attention to "male-on-male" violence and work to reduce it, that's also reasonable, and I wish you luck with your endeavor. (In all likelihood, feminist activism will - and already has - reduced male-on-male violence, even when it wasn't a specific target.)

But you still need to acknowledge that violence is primarily the domain of men. You also need to recognize that feminism is a movement by and for women. Our focus will always be male violence against women.

References below the cut:

Alexandra Thompson & Susannah N. Tapp. (2023). Criminal victimization, 2022 (307089; Criminal Victimization). Bureau of Justice Statistics. https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/criminal-victimization-2022

Homicide and Gender. (2015). UNODC United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

McCartan, K. (Ed.). (2014). Responding to Sexual Offending. Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137358134

Lawrence A. Greenfeld & Tracy L. Snell. (2000). Women Offenders. Bureau of Justice Statistics. https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/women-offenders

Archer, John, et al. “Testosterone and Aggression: A Reanalysis of Book, Starzyk, and Quinsey’s (2001) Study.” Aggression and Violent Behavior, vol. 10, no. 2, Jan. 2005, pp. 241–61. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2004.01.001.

Geniole, S. N., et al. “Is Testosterone Linked to Human Aggression? A Meta-Analytic Examination of the Relationship between Baseline, Dynamic, and Manipulated Testosterone on Human Aggression.” Hormones and Behavior, vol. 123, July 2020, p. 104644. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2019.104644.

van Anders, Sari M., and Neil V. Watson. “Social Neuroendocrinology.” Human Nature, vol. 17, no. 2, June 2006, pp. 212–37. Springer Link, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-006-1018-7.

Geniole, Shawn N., et al. “Effects of Competition Outcome on Testosterone Concentrations in Humans: An Updated Meta-Analysis.” Hormones and Behavior, vol. 92, June 2017, pp. 37–50. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2016.10.002.

Van Anders, Sari M., et al. “Effects of Gendered Behavior on Testosterone in Women and Men.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 112, no. 45, Nov. 2015, pp. 13805–10. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1509591112.

Dreher, Jean-Claude, et al. “Testosterone Causes Both Prosocial and Antisocial Status-Enhancing Behaviors in Human Males.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 113, no. 41, Oct. 2016, pp. 11633–38. PubMed Central, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1608085113.

Inoue, Yukako, et al. “Testosterone Promotes Either Dominance or Submissiveness in the Ultimatum Game Depending on Players’ Social Rank.” Scientific Reports, vol. 7, no. 1, July 2017, p. 5335. www.nature.com, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-05603-7.

Casto, Kathleen V., and David A. Edwards. “Testosterone and Reconciliation Among Women: After-Competition Testosterone Predicts Prosocial Attitudes Towards Opponents.” Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology, vol. 2, no. 3, Sept. 2016, pp. 220–33. Springer Link, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40750-015-0037-1.

Kelly, Aubrey M., et al. “Beyond Sex and Aggression: Testosterone Rapidly Matches Behavioural Responses to Social Context and Tries to Predict the Future.” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, vol. 289, no. 1976, June 2022, p. 20220453. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2022.0453.

Walker ·, Karla. “Who Was the Female Mozart?” Colorado Public Radio, 18 May 2022, https://www.cpr.org/2022/05/18/who-was-the-female-mozart/.

Hidden Herstory: Mozart and His Female Contemporaries - Women’s Philharmonic Advocacy. 22 July 2022, https://wophil.org/hidden-herstory-mozart-and/.

Kane, Jonathan M., and Janet E. Mertz. “Debunking Myths about Gender and Mathematics Performance.” Notices of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 59, no. 01, Jan. 2012, p. 10. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1090/noti790.

Lynn, Richard, and Satoshi Kanazawa. “A Longitudinal Study of Sex Differences in Intelligence at Ages 7, 11 and 16 Years.” Personality and Individual Differences, vol. 51, no. 3, Aug. 2011, pp. 321–24. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.02.028.

Michael S. Kimmel. (2001). Male Victims of Domestic Violence: A Substantive and Methodological Research Review. The Equality Committee of the Department of Education and Science. https://vawnet.org/material/male-victims-domestic-violence-substantive-and-methodological-research-review

Chen, J., Khatiwada, S., Chen, M. S., Smith, S. G., Leemis, R. W., Friar, N., Basile, K. C., and Kresnow, M. (2023). TheNational Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) 2016/2017: Report on Victimization by Sexual Identity.Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Truman, Jennifer L., and Rachel E. Morgan. Violent Victimization by Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, 2017–2020. Bureau of Justice Statistics, June 2022, https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/violent-victimization-sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity-2017-2020.

[ennn]

Thinking back to episode 1, where Agatha/Agnes clearly remembers losing Nicky (e.g. the bedroom scene), but doesn't remember why she hates Rio - even though those two things are so intertwined. Why do you think that is?

Hi Anon, thank you for the ask, and for the interesting observation + question!

I can think of 2 possible (Watsonian) reasons why Agent Rio Vidal isn't connected to Detective Agnes' lost son within the spell — and both can be true at the same time:

Rio popping up was unexpected and the spell — already distorted and stretched as it was — simply didn't have time or the juice to adapt this new character into its current storyline and setting.

It's possible that if things dragged on the spell could have made Agent Vidal somehow responsible for spell!Nicky's demise: What a delicious plot development that'd be for our small-town murder mystery prestige crime genre show!

Agatha does't want to remember why she hates Rio, as evidenced by Rio's follow-up comment: "You're only lying to yourself."

We know that the spell is being influenced by Agatha and what she believes about herself ("Is this really how you see yourself?").

E.g. Detective Agnes reflects how Agatha sees herself as a skilled investigator but also her belief and interest in the darker sides of human nature. Agnes' sad social life also reflects Agatha's own loneliness ("a lady cop cannot be good at her job and have a healthy personal life at the same time").

But I think the spell is also influenced by what Agatha wants to believe. Agnes here, as abrasive as she is, is still part of the community. People turn to her as a trusted expert. She's not shunned or hated the same way Agatha is.

And while Agatha has accepted that Nicky's dead and gone, she's struggling with the need to assign blame or reason for it. She ends up blaming Rio and herself.

And I think on the subconscious level that the spell pulls from, Agatha simply doesn't want to blame Rio.

She still has love and all these feelings for Rio but instead of dealing with what happened with Nicky — with how sometimes death and loss just happens beyond one's control no matter how much we love or how deserved it is — she prefers to run, to lie to herself (she's such a good liar).

It's this same reason why in episode 4, despite all evidence and reason pointing out that Billy isn't Nicky, Agatha embraces Rio and tries to kiss her. Don't get me wrong, Rio's truthful campfire confession definitely played a part too, but I think Agatha's an awfully good liar.

[chaithetics]

(3) Also, Logan knows that she’s pregnant and in that scene where they’re all together and start to give names to who’ll be sacrificed, someone mentions her and Logan immediately shuts them off “oh, that’s nice, throw the baby who’s pregnant and was never involved in the company as the sacrificial lamb!” but in a colorful, Logan Roy vocabulary. You’re a gem and I adore you!

Porcelain and the Shark: The Sleeping Lamb

Pairing: Stewy Hosseini x Porce (f) Roy Reader Word count: 3.1K Prompt: Combined with above and L to the OG's other prompt "Ken and Logan see Stewy at the end of S2. Porce is sleeping and he dismisses them, he's fuming as neither ask how she is." Warnings: Established relationship, children, anxious reader, reader is sick but pregnancy isn't confirmed, cursing, canon Succession family dynamics and angst. Roys being Roys! Some fluff. No descriptions of reader - you can imagine her as adopted, affair baby, different mother etc. A/N: We're so back... Happy Succession Sunday! L to the OG anon I hope you're still here! I'm so sorry how late this is, I promise the L to the OG request will be dropping shortly 👀 I can't believe this is the first Porce and the Shark fic of the year! I'll drop more I promise! I hope everyone enjoys this! Comments and reblogs are appreciated 🫶

The warm sun was meant to help, all the fresh air out of the concrete jungle gym should be doing more for you but you were laying in bed at the glamorous hotel with the doors wide open and a large glass filled with water and electrolytes. You’d felt ill for a couple of days now. Migraine, nausea - all of it. 

Jonathan was next to you colouring in and singing some song from the children’s film he’d watched last night and Tillie was fortunately napping. You’d hated feeling faint but it’s how you felt so you curled up more and watched Jonathan, your eyelids starting to feel heavy. 

“Here, honey.” Stewy says as he walks over with a cold compress and gently places it on your forehead. 

“Thanks.” You whisper and squeeze his warm hand. 

Stewy leans down and kisses your cheek, despite feeling ill your lips quirk up with a smile at the feeling of his facial hair brushing against your skin. It’s a guaranteed, natural response now. 

Anxiety normally simmered throughout your body and fogged up your mind but feeling nauseous and had clouded over that for once. It also helped that you’d changed your anxiety medication a few months ago and that seemed to be helping but being away from your family as they were on some overpriced boat that some pod of orcas had their eye on helped. But you still couldn’t help but worry about Roman, that stress definitely wasn’t helping the nausea flipping around in your stomach.  

Under other circumstances you’d cross firing lines to text him and make a joke about the orca pod watching them, he’d have found that that funny. If you’d sent it in the cursed Roy sibling group chat, Kendall would take the joke too far and Shiv’s white woman neoliberalism would be offended at being lumped in with those rich people. She was different of course. 

Connor had called her when they knew Roman was safe and was coming with them, something you were deeply grateful for. You’d texted Roman, the youngest of your older brothers, and just been met with a thumbs up emoji and then two minutes later a middle finger emoji. 

“Heard anything from Romey?” Stewy asks as he sits down on the bed next to you, he caresses your arm gently, the touch of his fingers so soft against your skin. He still makes your cheeks heat up and skin tingle. 

“No.” You whisper as you shake your head slightly against the pillow. “Just the emojis.” You sigh and as your head shifts so does the compress, Stewy gently fixes it and just nods. He looks out the window. 

He leans back slightly, laying on the bed. Stewy tilts his head back to watch you and smiles. He rubs your leg gently as he watches you. 

“Draw a chicken, mommy, please!” Jonathan says after a moment holding the paper out for you and a red pencil. 

You smile at him and Stewy smiles and scoffs. “Come on, mommy’s not feeling so great, can I draw a chickie for you?” Stewy asks, looking at Jonathan, the little boy, a younger mirror to his own face. 

Jonathan giggles and shakes his head, his dark curls bouncing as his small face screws up in cheeky delight. 

“No! Mommy’s chickens are better!” Jonathan says and giggles, and blows a raspberry at his father. Stewy chuckles and blows a raspberry back and then looks at you. 

“You don’t need to draw, love.” Stewy says gently as you take the piece of paper. 

“It’s fine…” You say smiling at Stewy and then giving your biggest smile to Jonathan who raises his shoulders up and smiles back. 

You chuckle and quickly sketch a chicken and some other animals for Jonathan to colour in, it’s been one of his newest hobbies. Requesting you and Stewy to draw things for him to then replicate and sketch in. 

“Thanks, mommy.” Jonathan says as he presses his face near yours as he watches you draw, his eyes widening in excitement as you finish up his chicken. He loves it and as he’s made clear, you’re more artistically inclined than Stewy. 

Jonathan starts to colour in the chicken, his tongue is stuck out as he does his best to stay in the lines. It’s a cute sight to see. Stewy watches too, he chuckles and ruffles Jonathan’s curls as he then looks at his phone. 

It’s a text that Kendall and Logan want a meeting, his eyes scan over each word, gaging how fucked Kendall is. Your tired eyes flick over to Stewy, noticing how quiet he’s gotten. “Everything okay?” You whisper softly, reaching your hand out to Stewy’s, he fully accepts the gesture and you intertwine your fingers together. 

“Yeah, uh, Ken and your dad. They’re apparently coming out, want to meet.” He says, looking away from his screen to your face, giving you a small smile. 

“Oh? Oh…” You answer. He rubs his thumb over your hand and you give him a smile that doesn’t quite reach your eyes as you take that in. It seemed like a red flag, a major red flag being waved off of a boat. You weren’t sure what to make of it all. 

“Don’t worry, I can tell them to leave. To not even bother, babe.” Stewy says, giving you a reassuring smile, he loves you, he can notice any sign of anxiety coming out and he can see your brow starting to slightly furrow. 

“No-no- it’s… it’s fine. Just, peace yeah? Olive branches, all that stuff… And, see how Ken is?” You ask softly, blinking frantically as your mind travels all over the things to worry about and think about. 

“You sure? You’ll be okay?” “Yeah, we’ll just nap, sleep. All the fun stuff for bonding.” You smile. 

The proxy battle had been an adjustment, one that had made the already tense and unstable Roy dynamics a million times more complex.  

Stewy blinks for a second and then nods. “Yeah, yeah sure.” He leans over and kisses your lips softly, he doesn’t care if this nausea is from some bug you’re going to pass to him. If so, he hopes it somehow reaches Kendall and your father. “You’ll be good?” He asks and you nod. 

It was a beautiful day, sunny and warm and this was not how Stewy wanted to be spending it. 

“Thanks for meeting man.” Kendall puts a hand out as if everything is water under the bridge. 

“Please. Please, please, please.” Stewy immediately goes into the hospitable host mode he was raised to be second nature. “Come, come, come. How are you, Sir?” He puts his hand out for his cold father-in-law. “Please take a seat.” 

“You guys need anything?”

“Yeah, don’t wait for us or anything.” Stewy laughs and Kendall laughs for a brief moment too. 

“I waited, but I was really hungry, so I ate with my family. Precious, precious moments.” Stewy tilts his head, giving them a smile that feels smug but never reaches his eyes. His brown pupils that you adore burn with proud frustration. 

His words are pointed. All three of them are fathers but the words don’t really register for Kendall who is just looking for a lifeline but they ring loud in old Logan’s ears. And they piss him off. 

“You guys good? You need anything?” He says as he blinks and shifts back into a generous host for the Roys and toes the fine line between this shit show. 

“Uh maybe in a minute.” Kendall says. 

Logan doesn’t say anything and looks unhappy to be there. Kendall gives his father a look and jumps right into business. “Well uh look,” Kendall flicks his hand, Stewy flicks his tongue, his face focusing on Kendall and the good humour gone. It’s serious now, nobody thought this would be a friendly visit after all. It never is with the Roys. 

“We both know it’s a- it’s a knife edge. You may have it, we may have it. Our proxy advisors tell us we probably have it.” 

“Mm-hm.” Stewy hums as he nods and picks his wine glass up. Neither Ken or Logan have reached for their glasses. 

“And, um…” Kendall looks at his father and smacks his lips, Logan’s completely unresponsive, acting oblivious to the whole thing. “Dad?”

“You look a little sweaty, dude.” The subtle indicators of a smirk slowly start to form as Stewy says it to Kendall. He wipes it as he turns to face Logan and sips from his wine glass. 

“Okay. Okay. So I’ve come to make a deal. This isn’t a negotiation. It’s a one-bang final-deal offer and it’s generous. So don’t insult me with a counter.” Stewy listens to Logan speak with an almost blank expression on his face while he places the glass down and picks up a piece of lavender from the arrangement on the table and lifts it to his nose. 

Jonathan had been doing that earlier, it had been pretty cute when Jonathan noticed the smell and then he had to wave them around and press it to everyone’s nose. Stewy doesn’t let the joy of that memory come through, but it’s so much nicer to think about than this. “I say this, we eat some octopi, we shake hands. Okay?” 

“Okay, I love that. I really do.” Stewy says as he puts the lavender stem down and drops it in front of his plate and pushes it forward a tad, he has no intention of sharing a meal with Logan and Kendall. Why do such a thing when the past exists? 

“Three board seats, including Ken’s.” Stewy shares a very loud knowing look with Ken who is silent. “You get a codified say in the appointment of our next CEO. We remove our poison Bill, conduct a strategic review on terms co-set with you, dismiss all our litigation on the proxy battle. Spin off cruises, okay?” Stewy’s looking less impressed now, even less so than how he felt when the message for this conversation made it into his inbox. He pauses and looks over his shoulder as if thinking, as if he was ever going to say anything different. “No, I don’t think that works.” 

“The fuck do you mean?” Kendall immediately blurts out. 

“Bullshit. Are you fucking stupid?” Logan takes his sunglasses off and looks pissed. “You have to consider that. You have to ask Sandy. That is a good fucking deal.” 

“It does not work for us, Sir.” He uses sir to still be respectful, even with this vile monster of a man. But he enunciates and pauses between each word to let them all sink in like rocks being thrown into water. 

“Dude, I mean, are-are you fucking for real? I mean you-you need to fucking make it work. Okay? Or I will personally fucking destroy you. I will come to you at night-” “Ken, it does not work.” He enunciates each word again to really hit Kendall in the face with it. 

“With a fucking razor blade and I will cut your fucking dick off.” “Fucking dick off.” Stewy says at the same time to finish Kendall’s sentence. 

“And I will feed it-” “And then push it up your cunt until poo poo pops out of my nose hole” Stewy shakes his head a little to give it a dramatic flourish. “Dude it doesn’t matter, it doesn’t mean anything. You can threaten to stuff a million severed dicks into my ball bag but the actual fact is we’re persuading more and more shareholders every day that we offer them just a slightly better chance for them to make a little bit more money on their fucking dollar. And that’s all that this is.” 

Logan’s silent with his elbows at the table, staring at his son-in-law. Stewy’s fuming internally but he doesn’t let it show, he’s not impulsive like the Roy children but it’s rude. It’s terrible manners to have your elbows on the table like that and Stewy can’t help but imagine a younger you getting scolded for something like that. 

He chews on the inside of his cheek and he can’t help but add it. They haven’t once asked about you, the daughter, the sister. Nothing, no concern, not even fake bullshit niceties. It’s an offence that they can’t even pretend to care for a second. Especially when he knows for a fact that Connor would’ve made some comment about you feeling ill, the nausea, the terrible headache and vomiting. 

Even if you weren’t ill, they still should’ve asked. It’s the bare minimum. Stewy’s eyes flick down to the table for a second and he picks the lavender stem back up. It smells peaceful, the opposite of this. He’s sure that when you go back home you and Jonathan will want to have lavender planted on the balcony and holiday home. 

“Really sweet of you both to come out and you know check on your family.” Stewy says as he twirls the lavender in his hand almost absentmindedly. He thinks about picking it apart, biting it. “She’s - your sister and your daughter - she’s doing just great. Nauseous and fatigued beyond your imagination, which I’m sure you’re both worried about. But Jonathan and Tillie are well, thank you for asking.” He stops twirling the lavender and tilts his head, he looks at Kendall for a moment, what a shadow of a man. “The Roys really know how to mix business and pleasure, right?” 

It was a stupid suggestion. Something unsurprising from cousin Greg but still mind boggling, he’d really outdone himself this time. When all the Roys and evil henchmen had sat around the cursed table of fate, Greg had panicked more than usual when Roman had suggested adding ‘Greg sprinkles’ to the Waystar Royco ™ guillotine. 

Greg had fumbled over his words and messily brought you up as a suggestion to be the sacrificial lamb. He weakly argued that you were a traitor for being Stewy’s wife and that was motive enough. None of it was plausible and before Greg could even string a full, coherent sentence together it had already brought a hyena laugh out of Roman, Kendall had just looked down and shook his head. 

“Fucking great! Hats off to that, have you seen her? Throw my own weakling daughter off - who’s probably fucking pregnant again - the only one who has actually given me some fucking grandchildren!” He spits out with venom. 

It’s a pointed shot at all of them, not a single Roy is truly in Logan’s good books. Tom stays silent but side eyes Shiv but she keeps her composure. She will not let them reduce her to a mother, it’s a pigeon hole she’ll avoid at all costs to keep the seat she’s only just clawed out for herself at the table. Kendall looks down because the blow hits him the most. Roman stops laughing and watches his siblings. 

“But oh willy-nilly-” Logan waves his hands, mocking them all. “Lets throw her, my fragile fucking blood that’s never been involved with the company as the sacrificial lamb on the rock. I’m not some fucking Abraham.” Logan’s eyes are wide and brimming with anger, he smashes his fist onto the table and glares at them all. All of the Roy children are looking down like they’ve been scolded, even though it was Greg. 

“Porce did have an internship in the publishing press during college, didn’t she?” Frank asks, thinking he’s somewhat more untouchable than Roy blood. 

“Gerri,” Logan’s tone is icy. “How does Frank look? What’s the angle there?” 

“How did it go?” You ask Stewy, sitting up and sipping some more water, starting to feel more and more human as the day went on but still nauseous. 

“Yeah, super! It was great, got to hear a lot of bad words from uncle Ken we can’t let his little ears hear.” Stewy says as he playfully puts his hands over Jonathan’s ears. You sigh and playfully roll your eyes. 

Jonathan giggles and squirms to move away from his father’s hands but Stewy just chuckles and starts to tickle Jonathan. 

It isn’t long after this that your phone starts to vibrate with notifications. Shiv has texted you asking what the fuck is going on, that Ken and your father won’t tell her what happened after visiting Stewy and she only found out from Roman that they saw Stewy. She’s scared about Tom. Then there’s a call from Connor. You answer him before thinking about replying to Shiv. You don’t want to be petty but your peace is worth protecting, it’s the first text from her in 6 weeks. 

Connor relays the sacrificial lamb conversation back to you. You’re kind of surprised that your father defended you but you’re not surprised that it was nasty and took shots at your siblings. Especially when the subject of Kendall’s fertility and children is a tense and sensitive one that’s weaponised often and feels heavy even in the subtle moments. 

Jonathan’s napping when this happens, you have the phone on speaker. Stewy’s listening quietly, gently rubbing your thigh as he concentrates. It’s easier to hear as Connor is whispering, he isn’t even sure if he’s really meant to be talking about this with you but it can’t wait for next Tuesday’s brunch and he’s also giving you whiplash by occasionally interjecting with his anxieties over Willa’s Broadway debut. 

You tell him it can’t be that bad and that you and Stewy will see it when you’re back in New York. You try to reassure him and after a while you rub your forehead and hang up. You turn to look at Stewy and sigh. 

He scrolls through his phone and then looks at you with raised eyebrows, a bemused expression. 

“It can’t be that bad, Willa’s not terrible.” You say, tilting your head and snuggling into his side. Stewy raises his eyebrows at you and smirks. 

“Wanna bet that for a smooch?” He teases and smiles more, his eyes are clearly saying it’s terrible. 

“No… It can’t be…” You quickly take his phone to go through the review and you swear you’ve just gone through most of the phases of grief and several other emotions reading that. You look up at Stewy and then chuckle. “Shit…” 

“Yeah…” He says and then lifts your arm up to his lips. Stewy starts to kiss from the tip of your index finger to your hand and then along your wrist and up your arm. You smile, feeling your cheeks heat up as he presses tender kisses up your arm. 

“I’m just cashing in on that little bet as much as I can.” He teases.

Lovingly tagging people who have interacted in the past (if you want to be removed lmk :)) : @ateliefloresdaprimavera @nadja-antipaxos @thegildedblogger @peachhiz @coocoolahh

@inknopewetrust @mittos @616wilsons @jolie989 @biblichorr

@foreverasleep717 @punisherinthealps

[asteria7fics]

Could you share some EWILY Cartman headcanons with the class? 👀

HAPPILY!! ( • ̀ω•́ )✧

My usual housekeeping: There WILL be spoilers for EWILY through chapter 11. If you haven’t caught up yet, then go read that first! (It’s a lot I’m so sorry)

Also, I’m going to include a few NSFW headcanons here… because I want to. They will be clearly marked though!

Without further ado, some of my Cartman headcanons!

Alright, first and foremost let’s get some of the basics out of the way. When I set out to write EWILY, I had a really specific image of what I wanted Eric to be like. He was actually the first character design I started drafting… while waiting at the hospital for my niece to be born ahaha.

Like, he had to be a bit of a neckbeard, Discord Mod loser. I’m sorry, I simply cannot imagine teenage dirtbag Eric being any other way.

So obviously I've posted the actual illustrations of all the boys, but Eric's appearance was one I was actually pretty nervous about. I don't see a ton of depictions of him having the longest hair, or being a bit scruffy looking in general. Though I agree that he probably does actually have decent hygiene habits typically, he's... Going through it in EWILY.

I also couldn’t imagine him being popular, because despite him honestly being pretty charismatic he’s still a despicable asshole and everyone in town is so used to his bullshit by this point that they’ve all but given up any hope that he’ll ever improve as a human being. His charms have become obvious manipulation by the time EWILY begins.

There is an actual story behind why the main 5 are no longer cool with him (for the most part), as is briefly referenced in chapter 7 before all hell broke loose, but that’s a story for another day.

Unfortunately, I also felt that Eric had to be smart. Is he taking all the same classes as Kyle just to fucking harass him? A little bit, though he would say it’s to ‘keep an eye on that conniving Jew’, but I think it’s pretty clear that he is actually a pretty smart and creative kid, he just doesn’t typically apply himself. Without friends to get into trouble with though, what else is he supposed to do?

I should also probably address the… antisemitism. I mean, it’s literally canon, as is him being a racist piece of shit, among other things. Look, I think there’s a time and a place to sanitize Eric’s character at least a little bit, but doing too much loses a quintessential piece of what makes him tick. I’m not gonna go into what makes people embrace bigotry, but suffice to say I personally believe a lot of his comes from ignorance and fear, especially the latter as he gets older.

On the flip side of that, I thought it would be super funny to give Eric a major fetish for Asian women! Partially inspired by my own love of k-pop, and partially from some comments Trey has made about his own… preferences, at least ones he had when he was younger. I actually pull a lot of inspiration for all of the boys from Those Bastards, despite my better judgement. It does have the nice effect of making them feel more real, though!

It also gave me the opportunity to make a very funny joke about his favorite member of a particular k-pop girl group, who has been majorly blasted online for wearing a shirt with a swastika on it… look, I saw my opportunity and I took it. The kids who got it, got it lmao.

I suppose this is a good opportunity to transition into some NSFW headcanons. This is your warning! I’ll mark the end of the NSFW stuff so you can skip it if you’d prefer!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Despite being pretty outwardly homophobic towards his friends, Eric is not straight lmao. He sure wants to THINK he is, but he’s bisexual at LEAST with a slightly stronger leaning towards women.

Initially, Eric is very confident that he needs to be the dominant one in the relationship. He would prefer women that seem submissive (hence the super racist Asian fetish, oof king just cannot be normal) and can be pretty easily manipulated, which is! Objectively gross! Bad Eric!!

Being one of the most sexual kids in the show (yes I do have a mental ranking), my brother is fucking nasty. Definitely was the one that got Stan mildly addicted to porn for a hot minute there (a headcanon I never explore but definitely need to), has a massive and extensive collection of pornography on his computer, on top of frequenting OnlyFans.

Eventually though, when he finally gets to actually feel the touch of another human being he gets over that need to be on top, literally and metaphorically. He relinquishes control VERY slowly, but eventually with a LOT of trust lets his partner have more power in the bedroom.

Also, his gf eventually definitely pegs him. Try and tell me I’m wrong. Do they get even nastier? Absolutely, but I’ll leave the rest up to your imagination. (˵ ¬ᴗ¬˵)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ANYWAY! Back to the normal stuff. (˶ᵔ ᵕ ᵔ˶)

Speaking of his girlfriend, I know it's not popular but I adore loverboy Eric. The idea of him fighting so hard to be a good person just to maintain an important relationship is *chef's kiss*

Now I won't formally diagnose Eric with anything, but he definitely has some... Antisocial tendencies. We see him visit a therapist a couple of times in canon, and I think he would keep that up until about the time his friends ditch him. Entering his social recluse era oof. He definitely stops seeing the point in improving himself when people are going to abandon him anyway.

So of course, he's still not a very good partner. I would get into his relationship with Yen more but, like with all the relationships in EWILY it's... Complicated.

Alright, I’m gonna do some quick-fire headcanons to get the rest of my thoughts out ahaha

Is the shortest of the main 5 - yes, even shorter than Kenny, but only by a couple of inches. This wasn’t always the case though, and was actually the tallest when they were kids. (TSOB era)

He and Butters have the smallest wieners. RIP sorry loser it’s canon.

Never really got over his little crush on Wendy. Funny how he’s still into girls with dark hair… (˵ ¬ᴗ¬˵)

Desperately wants another cat, but Liane has really only put her foot down about this one thing after what happened to Mr. Kitty. Sorry, I had to remind you.

Definitely still packs heat, but doesn’t get away with bringing it to school.

Hardcore schemer still and does all kinds of questionable shit to make money. You know, instead of just getting a normal job.

Wears those super long cargo shorts year-round. Claims he ‘doesn’t feel cold’ but definitely does.

Met Yen in a random Discord server, one he became pretty popular in. Still has lots of online friends that only really know the persona he puts on for them.

Man, what else is there...

I suppose this is a good place to drop some of the other things I've put together for him! You can look at his Pinterest board here, and his Spotify playlist here!

Okay, I seriously need to stop you guys, but I could talk about Cartman all day. Literally my son oh my god he’s so silly!!! I hope this was a sufficient answer for you, dear anon! I’m always happy to share my thoughts and feelings about these dudes!!

Thank you for the ask!! (˵ •̀ ᴗ - ˵ ) ✧

[theallegedbird]

The magnus archives? More like the magceraalisasoupnus archives

sorry i really don’t have any defence for this one

[mars-ipan]

Hi, it's me again. I decided to follow your advice and try to seek out your 'actually serious' analysis, which led me to your komahina bible, the most easy to find compilation of this supposed analysis. Here are my thoughts-

1) Overview

- Most of this 'analysis' isn't analysis but a summary/overview of the game. It's not so much a 'bible' as a children's book summary of the bible, which at that point it would be better to play the actual game itself. It's clear it was made for a presentation on the 'uninitiated' if you will, but if that's the case, you shouldn't be advertising it as the literal bible on the subject.

- When you are not regurgitating points from the game beat by beat, the screen is halfway filled with either manga panels or fanart. My gripes with manga panels are, that even though they do depict the events of the game, the way they can be depicted by the artist can be pretty subjective due to the freedom of the medium in comparison to sprites, and that the role of one character can differ depending on whose pov manga it is (chiaki vs nagito). Fan art therefore should be scrutinized even more since it fully depicts abstracted and even the fandomified version of events, leading to situations where it's either unclear what is actually happening or betrays your more shallow view of the characters (i talk abt this later.)

- When you do use pictures directly from the game it's either a possible screenshot from a memorable moment or dialog from the wiki, limited almost exclusively to the freetime events. This leads me to believe that you haven't actually played the game(there are other factors hinting towards this) or watched a Let's Play of it, but going off of merely information that's already widely known and circulating within the fandom, and easy to search on the wiki.

2) Incorrect/Questionable information

Here I'll compile a lot of information that's either plainly wrong or baffling to having come to that conclusion , leading more credence to the theory that you either haven't actually played the game or your memory of it isnt as good as you think.

-"if Nagito's plan went off of without a hitch, he would have killed anyone that was closes to him at the time" plainly wrong. Komaeda's goal from the start was to make himself the victim, so by dying this way his death could have meaning and help the others. For somebody that keeps talking about Komaeda's "Martyr complex" this is truly a weird take to have.

-"Nagito...got the nurse for sure sick" is there any proof that specifically points to Komaeda for this? I believe the takeaway should've been that Mikan got sick because she was around all of them AND she overworked herself trying to take care of them. Is this just an awkwardly phrased attempt to make more of a connection between Tsumiki and Komaeda? I don't think you needed more than the ones that already existed.

- "he helps Junko brainwash a bunch of students" Kamukura at neither point in the anime or Danganronpa 0 was ever specifically implicated in the brainwashing. He never 'helps' Junko, especially in that way. If you meant, participates in the student council killing game, you should've said that, but even then his agency and influence is limited.

-"they found the Remnants and captured them!"...no, they didn't. The Remnants presented themselves as survivors and the Foundation took them in. They handed themselves over willingly. It was a pretty big piece of the final part of the game...

3) Komaeda and Komahina

- "Nagito's habit of putting people on pedestals" Where. Sure, he certainly parrots the belief that the "Ultimates" as a unit are at the top of the food chain and should be prioritised, but its clear that doesn't exactly carry over to his classmates like teruteru, Kuzuryu and even Souda sometimes. Just because of a few positive comments refering to them as Ultimates and the trial which he literally breaks down in, this is a hard position to support.

-"Nagito manipulates Hajime into playing the game" How. He literally just told him to play it. How is that manipulation. Also, isn't it a bit unfair to put the blame on Koizumi's death to him as well? I think they were multiple factors playing into this, but sure, how else are you gonna convince people that Komaeda is a twisted fucking cyclepath that loves leading people to their deaths.

-The way that you say the Kuzuryu/Pekoyama relationship mirrors Komahina as 'I will give up my agency for you/ I just want you' is also confusing. Unless of course you mirror Peko's struggle with her agency and harmful beliefs the clan enforced on her with Komaeda's own belief system, in which case, idk man, i feel like you are giving a bit too much credit to the supposed severity of Komaeda's views and trying too hard to make Hinata the 'rational' and 'grounding' one in the relationship.

- Again, the amount of times you refer to Komaeda as a freak for doing something 'weird' or even being drawn weirdly doing it , mostly in the manga, makes me belief this isn't just an affectionate tongue in cheek joke as you claim, but an actual way in which your interpretation of Komaeda is colored.

-"it doesn't excuse his nonchalance towards tragedy and murder but explains it" what needs to be excused here exactly? Komaeda doesn't need to immediately bawl his eyes out when someone gets killed or else he's suspicious and...bad? I am confused with what you mean by this. If you mean that Komeada shouldn't be so nonchalant about murder because he's constantly trying to kill someone else, that is plainly incorrect and i explained above why.

-Posturing about Komaeda's 'black and white thinking' while in the next exact slide you show fanart of him smugly explaining he has Borderline. First, i want you to explain to me the black and white thinking in a way that isn't "oh, the friends and classmates i previously liked turned out to be fucking terrorists". I think that's a pretty justifiable situation for your thinking to go from white to black. Also, if that is enough credence to assign Komaeda BPD, you really don't know how BPD works, especially since you assigned it to the one character you constantly talk about being a freak (and also lust...pseudo lust? after).

- The insistence with Hinata not really understanding Komaeda and running away, even if he wants to understands him is pretty suspect, especially when compared to the game. Hinata is confused and overwhelmed yes, but it's not just that he wants to understand Komaeda but that he still feels fondness for him, he still follows his advice and puts his faith in him and the way he mourns him in Chapter 5 is also pretty indicative of this. It's just another part in the pattern in you making Hinata the confused, rational, 'morally pure' man that's 'tempted' by 'corrupted' manic pixie mentally ill demon Komaeda. Something tells me your priest AU isn't so much playing with dolls as much as...what you actually believe these characters dynamic is.

- The whole page where Servant is basically made into a joke about how hot and sexy and freaky he is doesn't help your point either.

-The most damning evidence of course is a drawing in the second to last slide, wherein Komaeda is supposed to be analogous to 'guy who has something wrong with him' (distorted, freak, mentally ill) and Hinata is analogous to the guy that 'is the only one that understands them' (the rational one, the relationship of understanding doesn't go both ways).

- Your slide with sources is pretty vague and unclear. Also the way that you credit "Your superior mind" before the game itself when all you've been doing is repeating and misinterpreting the plot of the game is ...ironic

So yeah, that's all I got. Feel free to 'debunk' my observations as much as you please, I just want to know if there's actual basis behind everything you just said or I should go digging for 'the actual serious analysis' yet again.

i think you forgot that fandom is meant to be fun

[twentyfivemiceinatrenchcoat]

Considering the analysis you made about Satoru and Suguru's selfishness, do you think that in a scenario where both are interested in the same person, Satoru would step aside because he would feel that Suguru could make you happier than him?

I DO ... I GENUINELY DO …..

this might be a hot take i’m not sure…. but i do very much think that any ‘competitions of love’ between satoru and suguru would end with satoru respectfully yielding. like. let’s say they’re in high school and bickering over their shared crush — they’re gonna try to woo you, gonna try to show each other up, but i think that the moment their feelings for you become a little more “real” satoru will be the one taking a step back. partially because it scares him a little, mostly because he’d prefer to see you and suguru happy than just being happy with you alone .

this is a little snippet from an ohshc va interview lmao but i think it fits the bill so i’m leaving it here…

“i think kyoya is very much in love with tamaki and with haruhi. he’s very much in love with the both of them. and i think it matures to a point where he would much prefer to see the both of them together than him with either one. because they make more sense together than he makes with anybody else.”

[itsaspectrumcomic]

hi im really sorry to bother you, and obvs you dont need to answer this at all im just some internet guy lol but do you think i could get some advice?

so ive been diagnosed with autism for like, 5 years (was diagnosed p late, in comparison to others) and im beginning to have some real goddamn big suspicions that i Also have adhd (because. yaknow. the gift that keeps on giving yk? lol). i have a lot of really major issues with executive dysfunction that is directly impacting schoolwork and also a lot of stuff in my life, generally. ive also got a lot of memory issues nd junk

and the thing is; ive got a therapist, but due to a whole slew of things im really scared to like, bring this up with her yk? and, like, im a minor so i cant exactly just seek it out myself yk? and i cant really talk to my parents about it because my mom is a very specific kind of vaguely ableist and my dad generally just isnt involved with that whole section of my being, yk? like, he doesnt manage any of my therapy, aside from bringing me to appointments when my mother isnt available.

and like, ive brought certain things UP to my therapist before and it went mostly ok, aside from one pretty distressing misunderstanding but it feels different for this one because i really do need medication for this, i feel. and thats a whole thing with my mother specifically, since at the start of the whole diagnosis process she outright refused the idea of medication and like. idk man, im so super sorry to write a whole bullshit essay when you're literally just vibing but yk. idk who else to ask lol, and you seem like you know what youre doing i guess?

real sorry. thanks in advance. insert other applicable signoff message here

I'm sorry you're struggling with this. Your therapist should be someone you can talk to about things like this but I understand being anxious about it. Are you afraid to bring it up because she's said ableist/anti-adhd stuff in the past or you have reason to suspect she won't help? If that's the case I really recommend trying to get a different therapist if you can. You deserve a therapist you feel safe sharing things like this with.

If it's impacting schoolwork it might be worth talking to your teachers to see if there's any additional support you can get from them. You don't have to tell them you suspect ADHD if you don't want to, you can just tell them you've been struggling with certain aspects of school and hopefully they can help. School is hard for lots of people so know you're not alone.

It might be different where you live, but in the UK you're able to make your own doctors appointments if you're over 16 so asking a doctor about getting a referral for a diagnosis/medication could be an option as well. Although waiting lists for that are incredibly long at the moment - I've personally been waiting nearly a year just to get an appointment 🙃

In the meantime, have you heard of How to ADHD on YouTube? Her channel has lots of videos with advice and various discussions about living with ADHD which you might find helpful.

Sorry I don't know if that helped much but I hope you're able to get support soon!

[pkmn-smashorpass]

Out of every pokemon u have posted so far which one is the LEAST SMASHABLE, in your opinion?

Ooh that’s tricky. I’ll be honest, I vote smash on every poll for the bit and also just cause I can be busy and I want to see the results without actually thinking about it. So I don’t really think about it. My first thought is Onix cause it’s just rocks. But I also couldn’t smash an Igglybuff or a Smoochum or pokemon that are too small and cute. Maybe Quilfish is my least smashable cause oofy ouchy?

[cable-salamdr]

Have you worn wigs?

Will you wear wigs?

When will you wear wigs?

Jokes on you I hav always vorn vigs **Dramatically pulls off hair to the the exact same hair but in bright blue**

[possamble]

seconding that anon abt the worldbuilding accuracy, i wouldnt have given it a second thought myself lol. personally im more of a character dynamics guy so its v much "source: dude trust me" meme situation except its me as a reader trusting u as the author abt that stuff -- tunnel anon

you guys are so nice to me. but you cannot trust me like that i am too stupid. it used to be "a three hour walk" until i actually double-checked and was like ooohhhhh that is geographically impossible. okay. cool.

[thewindandthestars]

WHO ARE YOU ANON??? REVEAL THY SELF THIS INSTANCE ‼️

[distort-opia]

found this poem called ‘the poem climbs the scaffold and tells you what it sees’ by natasha oladokun in a batjokes fic a while ago and was never able to shake the immense bruce energy of it.. thought you might get a kick out of it :)

Yes, you thought right, if the kick is in the heart and the result is pain and suffering. And the whole thing is beautiful, but the last part:

It really makes me think of the self-hating side of being Batman and how, to Bruce, it's part-punishment and part-self-destruction and part-atonement, for surviving something that his parents didn't. Every night Batman ("decked in black from scalp to heel/ scythe in hand ready and eager to meet yourself/ pounding at your own door") goes out to fight the evil that took his family and challenging it to take him too, but Gotham keeps spitting him back out, again and again. So Bruce survives himself just as much as he survives Gotham. Enough of him to feel alone, to yearn for other things, and that's what being Batman can't kill-- the animal in the poem truly depends on perspective. It could either be Bruce talking about Batman, or Batman talking about Bruce.

And then the road is too steep for him to see that there's light beyond it. That things could be different. So he keeps doing it.

[princekirijo]

Here's a random question that popped into my head: How does Riku regard Minato/Minako? Since Mitsuru and Yukari probably have photos of them in photo albums, Riku probably saw them, got curious and asked about them. How much would Mitsuru and Yukari tell him about them and how would Riku react?

Well thank you I love random questions :3

OK so two things.

1. Everything I say is subject to change here. I actually feel like this should be in my blog bio LMAO I am forever changing bits and pieces of Captain's lore and story. I have accepted that this is just part of the creative process and I want to put time into this silly AU so uh yeah. Take everything I say with a pinch of salt.

2. The actual answer:

Well... They're actually both alive for this AU 😸 In Captain Minato and Kotone (my preferred names for them) are twins (surname Arisato) and as I said they are both alive and well :] I still haven't really thought of an explanation as to WHY its just the twins surviving the Great Seal is kind of a guilty pleasure of mine in Persona fics so i decided to include it here :]

Persona Protagonists are interesting for me because each of them have their own established personality but I do think there's a bit of room to throw in your own interpretation too! Particularly because of having the multiple dialogue options. At least that's how I personally do things. Because of this, I do find it difficult to nail down exactly how I would incorporate them both into the AU, and subsequently their relationship with Riku (I'll admit this is actually true for a lot of SEES hence why I barely mention it).

However I think I can at least say this - Riku definitely looks up to both of them as really cool figures in his life, he admires their natural leadership skills for one. The three of them have something in common - each of them are really good at masking how they're actually feeling - Minato has his "I don't care attitude", Kotone has this cheerful polite persona (which is also very much a mask) and Riku has his whole bravado look at me thing going on. And the former two are very very good at seeing past the latter's BS LOL.

As for how much Riku actually knows, he does know a fair bit of what happened during the events of P3. Just not the whole death living inside Kotone/Minato + them somewhat dying to seal away Nyx thing. Yeah that's a story he isn't gonna understand for a WHILE (unless you wanna count CATT AU)

[fisherrprince]

Original anon here! Theres a couple sketch animatics u posted on twitter that i havent seen on here that im particularly fond of lol. First one off the top of my head is the one where sora roxas ven and vani are all like, doin a fun funky dance to an electroswing song i just. Holds that. The other one is cool sprawl spaceship moments that i loved. But like. All of them are so good,,, Anyways yeagh thats all from me lol,,

There's two spaceship ones! I'll post those in a second but

anon, at the risk of embarrassing myself so so badly because it's really old art and very earnest but old, and , old, and embarrassing on a fundamentally silly level, you can have this. I need you to take care of it. im very glad you like it. i like it. im embarrassed of the way i used to draw ven. and used to animate. you can have this.