#we are the people who actually have the disorder

[smosh-fessions]

this is kind of a hateful ask so feel free to just delete, but i watched guts (angela's short film) and some of the comments kinda disappointed me. it was such a well written, well acted, well directed short film and it was emotional and meaningful! media about eating disorders that's really honest and emotional isn't super triggering is so rare and greatly appreciated! i just hated that there were so many comments just about angela. granted, there's a lot of thoughtful comments and people saying the same thing as i am right now- but there are also a few comments of people being incapable of doing anything but talk about angela and her being on smosh. and it was enough upon initial release for me to notice and be frustrated by.

art is so difficult and this film was a team effort, why do certain fans want everyone to know that they're there mostly for angela and nobody else? does that not feel disrespectful to them? i felt similarly when patrick's short film came out- he and amanda have incredible chemistry and acted off each other with such natural tension and patrick was so menacing, towing the line between kooky and an actual threat. but all some people talked about in the comments and social media was amangela- which was only in the film for like. 5 minutes. yes, it's sweet and kinda gay that amanda wanted angela to be her wife for the film but that's literally such a small part of the film. there were other things going on.

it just frustrates me that when people like angela who are members of really popular groups make art outside that group, the fans of said group can't engage with the art that they're a part of without appreciating all the other people involved or the story being told. i 100% totally understand it- i would not have been served either short film had i not been a fan of smosh in the first place and i'm excited to see the cast members and patrick outside of smosh and especially for them to be so serious and good. but oh my god where is the decorum?

this rant was spurred on by seeing the fact that dan and phil fans (of which i am one) in the youtube comments section did not appreciate the other simmers on the sims anniversary livestream and just spammed dan and phil things the whole time. im begging some of u thst if ur gonna engage with media, pls for the love of god, show some love to everybody involved! it's cute that smosh appreciates the crew as much as they do- so let's keep that same energy for outside projects!! also this isn't critique of angela- she did incredible in both guts and i live in your house! i love her! i am angela giarratanamaxxing as we speak (idk what i mean by that but i am), but more a critique on how certain people engage with media. pls have some decorum, divas!

I agree a million percent. It's fine to leave a comment that you're happy to see more of Angela's talent, but as you said, people act like she (or whoever) is the ONLY person who made it.

It's not done in malice most of the time, I don't think, but that doesn't change the impact it has. I would be disappointed to see no comments on the rest of my film and only comments about one of the actors if I were Margeaux.

The film was wonderful and hit home for me more than I expected it to, and I wish more people took the time to look at these things for what they are as opposed to just a vehicle for more Angela.

This was very well said.

[aspd-culture]

aspd culture is “do I really have this” 100x

aspd-culture-is

[shitty-proendo-blackout-posts]

endos are systems.

you are cool. YOU. ARE. A. SYSTEM.

#endo safe <3

[ffcrazy15]

Sure you can. "Patriotism" is loving your country, and you can (and should) love something without thinking it's better than every other thing of its kind, or that it has no flaws.

Consider how a (sane) parent loves their child: they love the kid because it's theirs, not because their kid is better than every other kid (they aren't) or because their kid has no flaws (they do). The parents who truly love their kids recognize their kids' flaws and encourage them to become better, and they love their kid regardless of whether their kid is "the best."

Likewise think of the Austrian patriotism we see in The Sound of Music vs. German Nazi nationalism. What is the symbol of true Austrian patriotism in that movie? The Edelweiss flower. The Austrian captain loves this flower simply because it is the flower of his homeland. It's not powerful or rare, it's just a silly little flower. But it's their flower, and that's why he loves it. Contrast this to the Nazis and their swastikas, who have to insist constantly that Germany is the greatest country in the world and the most powerful and without flaw, and that's what makes it deserving of their love. They don't know how to love Germany for its own sake.

"Nationalism" in modern discourse is usually used to mean ultranationalism, i.e. loving your country in a disordered way—usually dishonestly (like pretending it has no flaws or that it's "the best") or putting it above higher goods (like loving your country more than you love God or other people).

So a true patriot, by definition, cannot be an (ultra)nationalist. Ultranationlists don't actually love their country because they don't want it to be better and they insist it has to be "the best" to be worthy of love. They don't love it, they just make an idol of it. The true patriot wants their home to be better, and loves it for its own sake.

(Credit to Chesterton for the argument, this was originally his.)

At the risk of getting too political: the antidote to nationalism is not hatred of one's country, but rightly ordered patriotism. You will not change your country by hating it, by doom scrolling, by fear mongering, but by loving it. St. John Paul II lived in Poland during the Nazi occupation and was part of the underground resistance that included reading Polish poetry and keeping alive Polish theater. He said the following about patriotism:

"Patriotism is a love for everything to do with our native land: its history, its traditions, its language, its natural features. It is a love which extends also to the works of our compatriots and the fruits of their genius. Every danger that threatens the overall good of our native land becomes an occasion to demonstrate this love."

If you are unnerved and upset by the increasing poltical polarization in American (on both the left and the right), the rise of alt-right thought, and the strains of nationalism, I have a proposal for you: Don't quit saying the pledge, go out and by a copy of the Constitution. Read it. Understand your rights and responsibilities as well as that of your neighbor. Read American literature and understand the historical context it was written in. Study American history.

If you go too far to the left you'll hit communism. If you go too far to the right you'll hit facism. Opposite ends of the spectrum, same results. You know what both of them did? Burned books. Spread propaganda. Spoon fed the population exactly what they wanted them to hear. Buy a book.

Your best defense against extremism of any kind, political or otherwise, is knowledge. And one of the things we are quickly losing in our digital age is exactly that. We have everything we could ever want at the tips of our fingers, yet we have forgotten how to think critically. A population like that is super easy to mislead. So, no matter your political convictions, don't be that type of person.

Love your country. Because loving your country is the only way you are going to save it.

[the-patrex]

I have seen a LOT of discourse about the finale so here is my final opinion on it: I Liked it I thought it was Very Bad

[lord-squiggletits]

I'm not completely opposed to making Pharma a weird guy in general pre-Messatine, the main issue I have with it is that a lot of that type of fandom is less "what if he was just a weird little guy" and more seems to be written with the implication that Pharma went crazy because he was just always a little crazy (or a little evil, or a little heartless, etc). Basically, to me it downplays the fact that Pharma underwent massive trauma for two years straight that other characters barely survived for a few hours/days and instead frames Pharma snapping as some sort of... I don't know, genetic/fated downfall because he was just weird, he was always off, is it really any wonder Pharma ended up Like That because I mean there was always something a little weird about him.

It just seems to accidentally imply that Pharma snapping under the pressure of years of torture was some sort of moral failing or sign of him being weak/immoral. You know, Pharma was always kind of a little creepy/insane/evil deep down which is obviously why he killed people. If he were just a normal, not-weird, good person then he would've been mentally strong enough to Not Go Insane. Like uhhhh it just seems kind of fucked up to imply that the reason some people are unable to cope with long-term trauma and have violent/unhealthy coping behaviors is because there's just something innately wrong with them, and then try and look back on their whole life trying to contextualize how they were actually unstable and evil all along instead of just accepting that like. Normal people (tm), yes normal and good people, can be put in situations where they're slowly turned into broken monsters because they had no escape and no good choices.

And also it's equally fucked up to imply that like. Whether or not you can deal with psychological torture without snapping is some sort of function of how innately moral or mentally strong you are. Incredibly victim-blamey to basically go "well the reason Pharma went insane is because he was just always cracked in the head, unlike our good buddy-pal-friend-hero Ratchet who's the perfect doctor and a good Autobot who's never done anything wrong which is why when he's an asshole/hurts people he's not nearly as destructive or Weird About It."

It's not that "Pharma was always kind of crazy" can't be done, because anything can be written well with enough thought. But I think in terms of writing, it's a very difficult and nuanced line to balance and most people literally just can't do it without implying that trauma victims/mentally ill people are evil or something. And Pharma is already unfairly villainized enough as-is, and in canon his trauma was already downplayed in favor of "haha crazy doctor chainsaw go brrr look how weird and quirky and craaaazyyy he is." So it's one of those things where 1. Most people just aren't good enough to write it and 2. "Always a little crazy" Pharma is already oversaturated enough in the fandom anyways and it's enough of a battle to get people to recognize that he's a tragic character and not just an evil asshole.

[helldritch6211]

If i re wrote red hood outlaws + arsenal n red would you want to see snippets of that or would you roast me on a pike?

[shatcey]

First of all, I wanna thank you for starting this brainstorm. I really enjoy reading your thoughts and comments, and I totally agree with all of you. But I have a bit to add (a bit for me, others may say a lot). Sorry about that.

But before I start… I love all the guys from the Alice's team. I have no prejudice against any of them. And I even spent quite a lot of time analyzing Will and Liam some time ago. So the antics of this character are not so alien to me, and I perceive them as individual traits.

But I never thought before that the reason people don't like them might be because of their team and not because of the individuals. This is rather unexpected way of thinking. Interesting, that's for sure.

Fairy tale

It was mentioned in the comments that the characters of this tale practically do not interact with each other if ever. It's hard to disagree with this. But… I came from a different angle.

It's a children's story. It is written about a child and for children. Our other stories are about adults. "Sleeping Beauty," "Snow White," and "Swan Lake." Yes, they are still considered fairy tales, but in the end… there's always a prince and a princess. And… you can guess what happens at the end. So… subconsciously, we expect mature content. And the villains in this tales are asking to be included in this finale. Am I the only one who thinks that way? If so, then ignore my last sentence.

I will not say that there are no children's fairy tales in which people could not…. imagine…. something… inappropriate. Like Little Red Riding Hood. Only the lazy one didn't think about the big bad wolf.

But Alice is too… childish… too colorful and crazy. I know that the story is based on a mental disorder, but it still seems too light. And there is no prince and princess in it… already not good enough.

And when we think about Alice's team, we subconsciously inevitably think about… the child. And… how to date them after that? It's a very strange feeling, you know… awkward.

So I think that the choice of a fairy tale wasn't that good. Will see which story they choose next, but I doubt it will be a story with a child in the lead role. It really doesn't work.

Connections in the past

Nagi mentioned that, I'll just add a little bit. They don't have a common past before Crown. But Liam has been with Crown for 7 years, so they have some common past with William… actually a lot, but the developers didn't tell us about it. And the time they spent together has not reduced the gap between these people. I see a problem in their character (more on that later).

And the developers could solve this problem with Chronicles. Even if they hadn't met in childhood. But they could. Both Will and Liam come from wealthy families… you can say from the same environment. They could have met somewhere.

If not. The developers could create some associations… from the past to the present. For example, there was someone that Harrison took care of as a child (I don't remember does Harry have siblings?), and Liam reminded him of that person. That's why he cares about him. Or something from Will's past that explains very clearly what he really thinks about all the guys from the crown. It's really hard to understand him, so… this would greatly improve the experience.

The associations that we build in our minds can be very unexpected… And it's not that hard to connect the characters, but… it needs to be done somehow. Otherwise they will just fall apart.

They don't feel like a team. And I see one of the problems is...

Self-sufficient

Both William and Harrison are exceptionally self-sufficient people. They don't need anyone. They don't have any flaws. I DO think so. And, on the contrary, we have poor little Liam, who has a lot of problems. It feels like the developers put everything they forgot to put into these two into the poor little kitten. Come here, little one, I'll protect you from these nasty people (a piercing glance at the developers). Yes, I will stroke your back so that no terrible nightmares can reach you. I know I'm talking to him like he's a child. Don't judge!

And who would have thought that self-sufficiency is a problem. If nothing is missing, nothing can supplement them. You all remember the joke about two cars, right? And so… combining them together is simply impossible by definition. Well, I have questions about Will's philosophy, but it's very difficult to use it in any way. And even more so with Harry. He is perfect both inside and out… The only problem is his curse, which prevents him from telling the truth. Poor honest guy.

Non family type relationship

The relationship within Alice's team is strictly business-like. You can say that the same thing is inside the Jude-Ellis pair. No. They have a very strong bond parent-child type. Jude protects Ellis and takes great care of him. So, no… It's not strictly a business relationship.

You could say that Ally and Elbie have a working relationship. No, Elbie never thought of Ally that way. And they have a very strong bond, which resembles siblings who love each other very much. And Roger and Ally, in contrast… resemble siblings who are constantly fighting. And again… it's very family-like.

But… Alice's team has well-defined positions. William is a boss, and they respect him and trust his judgment implicitly. Harrison just follows his instructions, and poor Liam is an errand boy, he not only does everything for his team, but also does the same for other teams. Like I said, poor kid.

So… It's a strong bonds, but strictly working. Yes, Harry seemed to care about Liam as if he were his own brother. But the whole team still lacks a family vibe.

And we all love family vibes… they're warm… And the atmosphere here is very cold.

Personality

And that's the biggest problem. They don't like to share. And I'm not talking about food or… people. They don't share their problems, they don't share their fears. They are used to working alone.

And more than that… they don't share their emotions.

William, as Kate said on his route, sit on the throne and look at others. He doesn't let anyone get close to him. Even to the closest people, he doesn't really open up, they are used to seeing only his very strong self-control. And that's how he feels… strong and reliable. He feels like a god, perfect in everything, but… he still feels cold and emotionless. A real god who has nothing in common with mere mortals.

Harrison, because of his personality (he is an introvert), doesn't like to talk much, doesn't interfere in other people's affairs. He doesn't want to, it's too much of a burden for him. Harrison doesn't show much emotion... again because of his personality. It's not bad, it's just who he is.

And Liam is the most active of the three because of his curse, but he still doesn't fit into any group because of his inner struggle. He doesn't really show himself. Despite the fact that he seems to be as sweet and kind as Ellis, the impression is different because Liam is more chaotic in his actions, and this leads to mixed signals.

And how to build the team with that behavier? It's impossible.

Connections with other teams

As Nagi mentioned, we don't have much interaction with other teams either. We have very strong couples… Willy-Vivi and Liam-Harry, sometimes (quite often) they show Vivi-Harry. And that's it. It is quite difficult to imagine anything beyond these four.

Oh… I forgot about Roger. Okay… we have also a pair Roger-Liam doctor - guinea pig.

Yes, we know (have heard) that Ellis is on good terms with Liam. But they didn't really show it, so it's just a rumor. Ally is literally babysitting Liam. We see this on Liam's route, but nothing outside. We know that Harry considers Jude to be his friend. Why? What makes him think that? What happened between them? Jude obviously doesn't share his feelings. William and Elbie have many mutual acquaintances due to their noble backgrounds, but they didn't use that either. So… there are many ways to combine them more tightly and make them a real part of the crown. At the moment… they seem like outsiders…

That's not good, Cybird. Not good at all.

I understand perfectly well that any or all of you may have a different opinion. I'm open to discussion and/or any criticism.

why team alice (as a whole) suffers compared to the others, other than the fact they r "starter routes"

DISCLAIMER: this post is not meant to undermine those who like team alice or any of the chars in that team; this is just a post i am making bc ive been thinking and theorizing a bit on especially why en doesnt seem to like will, harry, and liam as much as the other suitors as a whole. and i wanted to try to put it into words. but i'm also not really a professional when it comes to these matters, so take my words with a grain of salt. im open to hearing other opinions and welcome discussion, provided it remains civil!

long post + late night thoughts below

especially ever since i started translating, and after al's route release, i feel ive become more conscious of the concept of "favoritism". even in the source material, favoritism is present to an almost painful degree. like, it wont take you long to realize liam literally has no (solo) 95k stories, while jude has the most out of the entire cast. which then leads to the question, which i ask as neutrally as i can: why? why is liam so unpopular? why is will not popular? or harry? and conversely, why is jude and ellis so popular? why does team alice seem less popular than the other teams? after some thinking…

basically, my thought just all boils down to the "lack of chemistry".

i dont think the issue lies so much with the chars themselves. i feel a lot of community doesnt really hate them as chars, they just like the others more. all that to say — will, harry, and liam r all charming in their own right.

they r good-looking, kind to kate, they r intelligent, they r all affected in some way by their curse, and they all possess development arcs especially following their main story, which i feel may be a symptom of the "starter route syndrome". where their main stories may fall a bit short, they may make up for in basically all of the following events. they r all flawed, thus making them feel human and authentic.

as individuals, they r all actually quite well rounded, in my opinion.

but when you look at them as a team or group, this is specifically where they fall apart.

the thing is — its not just abt the individual. its also abt how they see the things around them, how they interact with them; you can have very well-made chars, but if they don’t interact with others, how can we, as readers, get to know them? and of course, when i say "interact", this includes other chars in the cast. they say dialogue can make or break, and while there r some things team alice does well in dialogue, i think in other areas it also falls short.

now part of it may also be that the team as a whole didnt know each other before they all congregated at crown, while all the other teams have known each other in some way in the past, with team snow white (and, i think swan lake) especially having an extensive history. so i think in this sense, there is some inherent disadvantage team alice faces here at play as well. but this is not the only factor, considering they actually manage to tie liam and harry pretty well together as a combo. their friendship feels quite authentic.

as for will…we dont see all too many opportunities for him to interact much with harry (if they do, harry is often with someone else, like liam). but we know they r probably on good terms, though harry sometimes may feel a bit unsettled,,? by will. but the key is: they just dont interact much as a pair. in this sense, there is little opportunity to develop them as a pair, thus integrating will as a whole into the team. as for will and liam? these two share more interactions, but said interactions r not always executed very well, in my opinion.

for example, will sort of treats liam like a cat. he even calls him a cat in dialogue. but thats all it seems to be between them. their dynamic feels somewhat flat, and it doesnt help that will is even opting to tell (rather than show) the reader what he thinks of liam, thus taking away the ability for the reader to dig deeper into their relationship. thus, it may feel harder to empathize, sympathize, or find it relatable — the chars dont reveal much abt each other. their dynamics feel surface level, so even though they have distinctive personalities, traits, and struggles, it feels like we r only getting half of them. bc again, much of how we get to know chars is their interactions, dialogues, and thoughts abt other chars, similar to how we cannot really understand ourselves without the presence of others (like the "looking-glass self" which sociologist cooley coined).

i probably sound like a broken record by now, but basically what i wanna say is there is not much of a good way to integrate will into the team — or the way they try to do so isnt done very well. the dynamic then may feel "incomplete", like drawing a half circle and attempting to call it a full circle.

to give a point of comparison, we can take a quick look at team snow white and sleeping beauty, looking at what made them relatively more successful compared to team alice. i wont be looking at team swan lake due to them being jp only chars (as of the making of this post) and also just not having much info on them. but, sometimes it does help to look at "successful" cases to better understand or feel what had fallen short.

TEAM SLEEPING BEAUTY

ok so, quick disclaimer: team sleeping beauty isnt really my strong suit (if yk me, im prettyy biased toward team snow white personally ndhjsffgjdjfjsg), so to speak. so if anyone else has anything to add here, feel free. but i will try my best.

basically, i think team sleeping beauty has one prevailing advantage over other teams, which is they r a two-man team.

they can keep the dynamic compact, if thats the word. there r physically less ppl to have to "integrate" into the team. in this team, it is centered around ellis and jude's relationship with each other. but to put it simply, they r foils — and the fact they use such a literary device in and of itself adds to their charm, specifically bc foils r meant to bring out each other’s similarities and differences…traits that we readers digest and can potentially empathize with.

one wants to make the other happy, obsessed with the notion of "happiness", while the other is basically cursed (as a byproduct) to never be the happiest. there is this theme of happiness revolving around those two, entangling them to a relationship that can inherently "never end". this in turn highlights ellis' tendency to "restrain" and jude's cycle of hatred. they sort of go together like yin and yang — two opposing forces who still end up working together. they have a distinct role to play in each other's lives.

on the other hand, team alice characters r sort of more independent from each other and feel a bit like a hodgepodge. this results in the reader potentially finding more difficulty finding how they may affect one another…risking their role as chars in each others stories being rendered vague.

and if the role of chars is hard to be established, it is easy for them to "fall out" in terms of the storyline.

TEAM SNOW WHITE

so here is the three man team that makes the three man team work. and the biggest thing that team snow white has that team alice doesnt is distinct, complex dynamics established between all three chars in the team. in other words, they have a "full circle" whereas team alice has a "half circle".

ALFONS & ELBERT: ah yes the pairing that would become a couple if they were not labeled as love interests for kate in an otome game /lh but in all srsness these two do share quite an interesting dynamic. they were sort of there to share each other's pain, and even just as chars, they seem to reflect things abt each other. for example, through elbie, we learn of how "hopeless" al can feel despite his smiley front; and through al, we see a lot of what elbie was truly seeking and why. and how, despite al being a mirror that reflects others' desires, elbie is the mirror that keeps al grounded to his self, and reflects what makes al as a char. they share a close relationship of "two lonely and broken souls finding solace in one another", but there is also quite a bit of subtext in the semantics of their dynamic and dialogue together as well.

ELBERT & ROGER: considering elbie's fear of doctors, it wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that, despite the fact roger had never actually laid a finger on elbie the same way his father's doctor did, elbie still feared roger, bc roger still embodied the concept of what had deeply traumatized him in the first place. roger had to go out of his way to earn elbie's trust (as a doctor), and they had gone out of their way to depict this. in this sense, through roger, we can see just how deep-rooted this trauma is and its severity — time cant heal all wounds.

ROGER & ALFONS: theres quite a bit to unpack with these two. they r deeply intertwined in each other's lives, whether they like it or not. its not that al gets along with roger or views him as a "friend", per se, but he finds it easy to place the blame of his suffering on roger, implies through subtext that he still holds some hope for roger that he can fulfill his goals, and shows his own version of an act of kindness by erasing his memories when he decided to, well, off himself. on the other hand, interestingly enough, roger is the one who basically took away al's childhood, but at the same time, in the present, he is the one who is able to bring out al's most childish side.

all in all, team snow white seems to rely a lot on subtext, which is another device to create mult layers and complexities in the dynamics created between all the characters in the team.

tl;dr: team alice has individually interesting characters, which is why they r not really disliked necessarily, but their interactions with each other as a team fall short compared to the other teams, which in turn has an impact on how "relatable" they may be perceived by the reader. and this is basically why i think team snow white and sleeping beauty r more favored than team alice as a whole by the (en) fandom.

wrote most of this on my phone nfjsjhfhsgs will end the essay here

[delphientropy]

i cant fucking have ANYTHING

owner of an alterhuman community is a plural pro endo and wants anti endos to fuck off (and i understand and respect their decision it makes sense) im actually gonna lose my fucking mind

can we have ONE anti endo alterhuman community i swear to fucking god. doesnt even have to be anti endo. one that just doesn't fucking CARRREE

thats it im making my own. fuckall

[macabre-crab]

“himimimimimimi book alicent would never!! book rhaenyra would never!! book rhaedkdkdndkskfndofntkdofndk-“

“History will paint you as a cold queen.”

YEAH THATS WHAT I FUCKING THOUGHT !!!!

[caligvlasaqvarivm]

wanna ask how you feel about the eridan bpd headcanon/theory(?? not sure what to call it!) you're so good at your character analysis and i'd love to see your outlook on it

Since I don't have a degree or any formal training in psychology, I feel deeply uncomfortable diagnosing characters. I've made an autism joke before but only because I'm on the spectrum. He's definitely traumatized and anxious, but I mean those as descriptors of his behavior rather than capital-D Diagnoses. I try to focus on those when I can - the cause and effect of cognition, self-image, and behavior - and those factors may very well match up with DSM criteria, but I try not to touch an actual diagnosis with a ten foot pole unless the author has explicitly stated that X character has Y condition.

[monstermoviedean]

hey do you think next time i'm stuck in another pearl-clutching hysteria fest about how cell phones are ruining The Children i should tell them cell phone bans are the technological equivalent of abstinence-only sex education

[funpuddle]

i say this as someone whos friends w a handful of plural/DID buds.. it's okay to come to terms with ur plurality. it's okay to say you have DID. its a frustrating thing to have and the world is very unkind to those with DID/who are plural. you kind of seem to brush off the really horrible trauma that seemed to happen to you really young, at least what i can glean from ur public posts and art. no, it's not normal for the bulk of everyone to have seperate identities or "guys" in their heads to cope with the world, but thats okay! no two people will experience mental illness in the same way. but sorry yeah, was going thru ur blog bcos ive been off tumblr for a min and saw the post conflating "alters/headmates" with "ocs/kinning". i mean this in the nicest way, they are not even close. me having a guy i project things i like/parts of me is not the same as having ur forming identity shattered into pieces by trauma and then ur brain coping to try and "fix" it by making a guy or guys to try and manuver the world

We all have parts maybe trauma just makes them more distinguishable. I was calling what were basically alters Ocs for the entire duration of middle and highschool and blurring the lines between straight up compartmentalized bits of self to serve a function, maladaptive daydreaming, and actual character writing. I think it's mostly fine with some awareness. For me it's just different words to describe things that perform the exact same function to various degrees. It's like a spectrum. But it's personal to everyone. I don't say that to negate my own trauma I say that but I think we can all be considered plural if we really looked hard enough.

Human brains don't follow DSM rules. Words and labels were made to serve us, not the other way around. I appreciate the sentiment it seems in good faith but in my opinion It's not helpful to fit brains in boxes

I am taking note of how it is safer to call an alter an oc than to accidentally call an oc an alter and perhaps I will have to think about that further and what it implies regarding internalized fears, but there is some genuine comfort in "not committing" to the idea and just letting feelings and thoughts come as they are, as they present themselves

[aspd-culture]

sometimes i feel like how i am just makes more sense. how do you think the world would be different if everyone "had aspd" (but in this world, it would just be being normal)?

Hmmmm.... Damn I'm really unmasked right now so this is probably the most honest answer I could give you (based on my opinion of course, none of this is fact and for all intents and purposes this answer is entertainment value only not educational bc who knows if I'll agree with myself once we find wherever that mask is hiding).

First and foremost, society is kind of gone in this case. Or reverted, I guess. That's a major point with ASPD is that we didn't develop the way everyone else did to be a part of society, desire to be around people, fear people disliking us (because in the wild that could mean dy*ng), etc. We still have the understanding of the need to congregate and therefore would likely still have settlements nearby, but I'm guessing everything would be a lot more spread out. I'm sure there are plenty of pwASPD who don't feel this way, but all the pwASPD I know personally hate the concept of neighbors that can perceive them while standing in their own yard or worse their own house. So firstly I think that houses would likely be further away, and that things like trailer parks and apartments would be significantly less common.

I also think that laws surrounding where you can build a house and the safety stuff involved like permits would be more lax - leaning towards a "if you didn't do it right, you'll be the one to have to deal with it" mentality, and in that I think more people would be housed but probably significantly less safely. I don't think this would extend to things like basic building stability and electricity and such, because that would cause issues for more than just the idiot who didn't do their research, but for things like lead paint, proper insulation, and such like that.

In general, probably a lot of things would lean that way - with more overall protections for people because we A.) don't like to hear people complain and will sooner do the right thing to shut them up than continue to allow their whining in a lot of cases and B.) we understand that the entire purpose of humans living near each other is to help and C.) in a world where ASPD was the norm we know that if I (general I) don't help you (general you) when you need it, there will be no empathy or anything making them feel bad if you don't help when *I* need it. Everyone takes what they need and gives what they need and I doubt people would bother to abuse the system because we are smart enough to know that gaming the system is actually screwing all of us over bc now when people need help that isn't there, they will have no qualms about coming to the house of the person who stole all the resources for themself and asking what that person intends to do to fix the problem they made.

See, a lot of the reason that pwASPD who manage to go on to be your high-profile wealthy CEOs do that is because it's easier for them than a prosocial. Stepping on people to get to the top, knowing that those people will likely barely see it as you doing something wrong. They feel for you and they understand you were taught greed and all that, so they're easy to manipulate. Give them a bonus check that doesn't even bother a percentage of your profits every year around the holidays and you're considered a great boss doing better than most. Let them call out every once in a while and only give them a little heat about it and they'll worship you because it's better than most of what's out there.

But other pwASPD see through that, so I don't think hyper-selfish people with ASPD would manage to thrive in this type of "society" the way they do with a majority prosocial one.

I think that we'd also help to establish better things for people with ASPD - more stuff like wreck rooms and such - that allow for the easing of those symptoms without breaking your sh*t or hurting anyone, while also getting rid of laws that are, well, stupid in our eyes and help decrease the annoyance that causes our symptoms to flare in the first place. You're stealing baby formula? Go at it. I don't care. If we notice because you're stealing a bunch of shit then you did a shit job of stealing and then there's probably consequences. Maybe. If the dude on shift feels like dealing with it.

I think only the big things would continue being illegal by any degree, and I think the system would probably be much more collective rather than things like managers, politicians, etc. We're not a fan of people telling us what to do more often than not, so I think all of us having a turn would be the way it would work. I think most everything would go to majority vote.

I honestly wonder if money would even survive in a world entirely set up by pwASPD or if we'd just make all the transactions by association like the old barter system. People say that the reason we can't go back to that in today's world is because we wouldn't be able to decide what services were worth what other services but that kind of removes the point of the barter system in the first place. It's not about the services having a "value" it's literally just about "I need this and you have it, you need that and I have it, let's trade". This is already how we view our relationships - not caring if the give and take is equal as long as we both are walking away cool with it - so it makes sense we'd extend that to a general rule.

In a weird way I just feel like we'd be less connected but more collaborative. No I don't want to have small talk but I do have bread I'm willing to give to someone who can get me antibiotics. And no one would take offense to that because *none* of us want to do the small talk.

Plenty of pwASPD do enjoy friendships and relationships and so I think in those cases, you'd see people who want that finding that and people who don't just not participating.

I don't think everything would change, because to a degree there is some ASPD influence in how things work atm, but it's a prosocial lens on it even for the things that have that influence.

There is also the solid possibility that it could just be anarchy tho :/ It depends because honestly all of this is coming from the place of "us all developing ASPD knowing what the world is like now and what isn't working" but if it wasn't like that who really knows what would happen. (apparently my use of emoji means that sentence has to be in bold on this font)

I refuse to re-read and edit this rn and I won't want to do it later so RIP if this is a mess of a post to read or contradicts itself, etc. But I promise I do care about this blog and the content on it/gen - the reason why I'm being selective about which asks I'm willing to do while in this state - I'm just impaired by the low mood stabilizer levels so I'm honestly worse than just unmasked rn. Like me normally without a mask and without any mood stabilizer at all is more composed and gives more of an f then I do rn but god guys Lamictal withdrawal will kick your *ss. Idk why I'm explaining this like I would to a group of prosocials tho XD I more often get questions on this blog about why I *don't* act like this.

Plain text below the cut:

Hmmmm.... Damn I'm really unmasked right now so this is probably the most honest answer I could give you (based on my opinion of course, none of this is fact and for all intents and purposes this answer is entertainment value only not educational bc who knows if I'll agree with myself once we find wherever that mask is hiding).

First and foremost, society is kind of gone in this case. Or reverted, I guess. That's a major point with ASPD is that we didn't develop the way everyone else did to be a part of society, desire to be around people, fear people disliking us (because in the wild that could mean dy*ng), etc. We still have the understanding of the need to congregate and therefore would likely still have settlements nearby, but I'm guessing everything would be a lot more spread out. I'm sure there are plenty of pwASPD who don't feel this way, but all the pwASPD I know personally hate the concept of neighbors that can perceive them while standing in their own yard or worse their own house. So firstly I think that houses would likely be further away, and that things like trailer parks and apartments would be significantly less common.

I also think that laws surrounding where you can build a house and the safety stuff involved like permits would be more lax - leaning towards a "if you didn't do it right, you'll be the one to have to deal with it" mentality, and in that I think more people would be housed but probably significantly less safely. I don't think this would extend to things like basic building stability and electricity and such, because that would cause issues for more than just the idiot who didn't do their research, but for things like lead paint, proper insulation, and such like that.

In general, probably a lot of things would lean that way - with more overall protections for people because we A.) don't like to hear people complain and will sooner do the right thing to shut them up than continue to allow their whining in a lot of cases and B.) we understand that the entire purpose of humans living near each other is to help and C.) in a world where ASPD was the norm we know that if I (general I) don't help you (general you) when you need it, there will be no empathy or anything making them feel bad if you don't help when *I* need it. Everyone takes what they need and gives what they need and I doubt people would bother to abuse the system because we are smart enough to know that gaming the system is actually screwing all of us over bc now when people need help that isn't there, they will have no qualms about coming to the house of the person who stole all the resources for themself and asking what that person intends to do to fix the problem they made.

See, a lot of the reason that pwASPD who manage to go on to be your high-profile wealthy CEOs do that is because it's easier for them than a prosocial. Stepping on people to get to the top, knowing that those people will likely barely see it as you doing something wrong. They feel for you and they understand you were taught greed and all that, so they're easy to manipulate. Give them a bonus check that doesn't even bother a percentage of your profits every year around the holidays and you're considered a great boss doing better than most. Let them call out every once in a while and only give them a little heat about it and they'll worship you because it's better than most of what's out there.

But other pwASPD see through that, so I don't think hyper-selfish people with ASPD would manage to thrive in this type of "society" the way they do with a majority prosocial one.

I think that we'd also help to establish better things for people with ASPD - more stuff like wreck rooms and such - that allow for the easing of those symptoms without breaking your sh*t or hurting anyone, while also getting rid of laws that are, well, stupid in our eyes and help decrease the annoyance that causes our symptoms to flare in the first place. You're stealing baby formula? Go at it. I don't care. If we notice because you're stealing a bunch of shit then you did a shit job of stealing and then there's probably consequences. Maybe. If the dude on shift feels like dealing with it.

I think only the big things would continue being illegal by any degree, and I think the system would probably be much more collective rather than things like managers, politicians, etc. We're not a fan of people telling us what to do more often than not, so I think all of us having a turn would be the way it would work. I think most everything would go to majority vote.

I honestly wonder if money would even survive in a world entirely set up by pwASPD or if we'd just make all the transactions by association like the old barter system. People say that the reason we can't go back to that in today's world is because we wouldn't be able to decide what services were worth what other services but that kind of removes the point of the barter system in the first place. It's not about the services having a "value" it's literally just about "I need this and you have it, you need that and I have it, let's trade". This is already how we view our relationships - not caring if the give and take is equal as long as we both are walking away cool with it - so it makes sense we'd extend that to a general rule.

In a weird way I just feel like we'd be less connected but more collaborative. No I don't want to have small talk but I do have bread I'm willing to give to someone who can get me antibiotics. And no one would take offense to that because *none* of us want to do the small talk.

Plenty of pwASPD do enjoy friendships and relationships and so I think in those cases, you'd see people who want that finding that and people who don't just not participating.

I don't think everything would change, because to a degree there is some ASPD influence in how things work atm, but it's a prosocial lens on it even for the things that have that influence.

There is also the solid possibility that it could just be anarchy tho :/ It depends because honestly all of this is coming from the place of "us all developing ASPD knowing what the world is like now and what isn't working" but if it wasn't like that who really knows what would happen.

I refuse to re-read and edit this rn and I won't want to do it later so RIP if this is a mess of a post to read or contradicts itself, etc. But I promise I do care about this blog and the content on it/gen - the reason why I'm being selective about which asks I'm willing to do while in this state - I'm just impaired by the low mood stabilizer levels so I'm honestly worse than just unmasked rn. Like me normally without a mask and without any mood stabilizer at all is more composed and gives more of an f then I do rn but god guys Lamictal withdrawal will kick your *ss. Idk why I'm explaining this like I would to a group of prosocials tho XD I more often get questions on this blog about why I *don't* act like this.

[us-the-voices-and-more-voices-2]

a quick reminder to everyone

I have SEVERE LEARNING DISABILITIES

I am literally disabled because of my learning disabilities, I have faced literal descrimnation because of it.

everytime you call us retarded or a retard you are ACTIVLY upholding the systems in which I am trapped in.

I take more offence in being called a retard than anything due to the literal DECADES of systematic abuse and descrimnation from the medical system, every single government resource, and almost all school alternatives.

fuck you greatly if you use these words against us, I have to live in a country where they hate people like me and would rather us dead than to do literally anything to help people like us.

call us what you will, but I will never call anyone retarded because it’s a basic decency reserved for everyone.

I’m a very happy retard, fuck your ableism!

I will happily live and love and learn even if THE LITERAL GOVERNMENT doesn’t want me too.

(yeah being a mid supports autistic with other learning disabilities and disabilities in general that made me unable to attend a school just means I deserve to die. 100% legit I deal with this literally all the time always fuck the Australian government)

so again fuck you all greatly, for using a literal slur against me one that has been used against me since I was a baby.

fuck you all, genuinely.

did I forfeit my rights to be treated as a human being the moment I had a bit of trouble learning things? Because if I did I’d like to break someone’s teeth with a brick.

Edit: the language and lines between what the fuck developmental disabilities and intellectual disability are is confusing as fuck.

I have gotten very confused between the 2 because they are grouped together half the time.

My apologies to everyone for being utterly confused where I fall because it is extremely confusing to figure out, and internationally it varies wildly according to my brief reading.

I did not mean to be mean or anything I just was genuinely going off what I’ve been told most my life lol.

Shout out to my developmentally disabled brethren you are loved

[vain-creature]

is it like… an inherent narcissistic trait that a person w NPD must be constantly manipulating and on edge and that every part of their life must be entrenched with the disorder?

I was thinking i might have it but unless in direct danger of vulnerability or being seen a certain way I just… chill? I’m not always on the lookout and manipulating and everything I do or don’t do isn’t always related or consciously related to it. Again, I’m just questioning so I might not be the best example of this, but I believe there are people with NPD who live “normal” lives, just with a disorder? People with diagnosed NPD who have friends and partners and family they’re not bent on manipulating for attention? That they like spending times with for the sake of it? And I’m sure there are people with NPD who have a job that has nothing to do with their disorders, or is even in direct conflict with it (for example something that draws little attention but that they like doing)? Because people with NPD still have a conscience and likes and dislikes.

Even discarding my own possibly non-NPD experience, it’s still weird the way people who have it are framed. And it is very characteristic of this personality disorder, and not any other (maybe aspd? i’m not sure).

For example, I was just reading an article on NPD, and the (clearly biased) writer said: a covert narcissist will pretend to be shy for attention. And I was like: or maybe they are shy? why can’t they just genuinely be shy? NPD is a disorder that affects people, not a strict way to be that controls every part of the person. People with NPD are still people and they still have personality, and they can be shy. Maybe the vulnerable narcissist is actually shy and quiet? Instead of presenting as such for attention.

I swear this view of the disorder is so stupid, I can’t believe it is the shared consensus.

Yeah, I think believing that every pw/npd is inherently a manipulator is extremely biased. Just because someone has NPD it doesn't mean they are a master manipulator, and depending on what it is comorbid with it can look really differently (eg. autism, like with me)(and don't get me started about how hard it can be to even notice that what you are doing/thinking/feeling is not really normal, especially with comorbidities!)

The disorder is inherently a part of how I view the world, sure, but it doesn't cause me distress 100% of the time, every second, every day. In my opinion the diagnostic criteria are pretty ambiguous (I am one of the "takes everything literally unless hinted otherwise" people so I went "well I am not doing x ALL the time so I don't fit the criteria")

I, personally, resort to manipulative actions when I am feeling like my ego is in danger, and in most cases it is, as I call it, a knee-jerk reaction, instinctual, automatic, subconscious. A lot of epithets, I know, but I want to convey the thing clearly sksksk. Even when I do it consciously, it is not malicious - my main goal is, always, first and foremost, preserving my ego, preserving my image. I don't deny that I may have hurt others through my actions, but I don't want it to happen. I don't like hurting others because it also endangers my ego, after all. Being a good person is very important to me, and both external and internal validation are really important for my mental well-being. If I went left and right hurting others it would be really damn hard to get that external validation!

So, when nothing like that is happening, I am well-adjusted, I would say, at least in the npd range. Do I still think of other people inferior and myself superior? Yeah. But I also have people my mind considers equal to me, people I genuinely enjoy spending time with. (Also like. just because I think someone is inferior it doesn't mean I treat them badly?????? Idk where that notion came from in anti-npd folk, but like in my eyes me treating people I find inferior nicely is actually proof how good of a person I am so like???)

Because of knowing I have NPD I have started noticing when I am manipulative, and, just like you said, I have at least the semblance of conscience, so I really try to restrict that. Not always works out, but at least I am trying. Not every pw/NPD is evil and malicious, after all.

Also, like, most people need some form of attention to be healthy, fishing for it has no negative value.

There seems to be this specific bias appearing when people write or generally perceive pw/NPD -> every little action, every trait, every word, is, actually, a well-orchestrated plan to manipulate or otherwise fool others. Well, that's straight up wrong. There's so much diversity in the world, it's not that improbable that someone with NPD could be shy, for example. We are not cartoon villains rubbing our hands together at every possibility to lie and deceive!

If the perception of NPD was not.... what it currently is :/// I would have known way earlier! At least for me it was a random coincidence that I learned stuff about NPD that was not the evil black-eyed demon from pop-psychology. I was extremely unaware of all the ways it manifested in me and now I can actually realize that my feelings and thoughts are actually often skewed.

There is always one article I like consulting about things NPD, NPD Basics from McLean Hospital, which outlines that current diagnostic criteria are... well. Really biased towards the grandiose side of NPD

The NPD diagnosis in DSM has been criticized for being one-sided and relying primarily on external socially and interpersonally striking and provocative features. As such, it has failed to capture the full range of narcissistic personality pathology, especially the internal vulnerability and insecurity characterized by severe self criticism, insecurity, confusion, shame, aloneness, and fear. Instead, the diagnosis has primarily emphasized external characteristics related to boasted grandiosity, and obviously adverse interpersonal functioning. Important aspects of the patient’s internal distress and painful experiences of self-esteem fluctuations, identity diffusion and emotional dysregulation have not been included.

Contrary to the external confidence, arrogance, and insensitivity, people with pathological narcissism and NPD tend to struggle with a shifting and conflicting sense of self and identity. Underneath a more noticeable self-praising or self-enhancing outward facade they can be excessively self-critical and judgmental.

Both clinical and empirical studies have confirmed that emotional distress, interpersonal vulnerability, a sense of inadequacy, need for control, avoidance, and fear, pain, and anxiety are important facets of narcissistic personality functioning. Co-occurrence and fluctuations between self-enhancing grandiosity and self-depreciating vulnerability are also present in narcissistic pathology. Typical indications of narcissistic vulnerability include inferiority and insecurity, avoidance, shyness, hidden aggressive reactions, shame, and persistent self-negativity. Paradoxically, hidden excessive self-negativity can also serve empowering, protective, and controlling functions. Additional characteristics frequently found in patients with NPD are perfectionism and high standards accompanied by self- and other-directed criticism, as well as by preoccupation with fear of not meeting standards and of failing. In addition, chronic envy, rage, boredom, and emptiness can co-occur with hyper-vigilance and defensive emotional reactivity, especially aggressivity, criticism, and dismissiveness.

^ Three interesting fragments. Notice the connection between traits associated with grandiosity with underlying issues associated more with covert npd -> at least in my experience they are two sides of the same coin! That's why I don't necessarily identify with one or the other, because depending on the situation, social norms and people I am with, I may come off as both a grandiose and covert narcissist! The line is not as rigid as it may seem, I would even say it can often be nonexistent.

mclean.org/npd-provider-guide

^ a link for those interested! It's a really good read and I recommend it to anyone questioning if they may have NPD

:)