#weirdo behavior!!! (exhibited by me)

[starfruitflames]

saw this dude in roblox regret elevator and IS THIS GUY A NEOPET????

[caffeled]

is sheldon cooper good autistic rep??? nah not particularly, generally speaking, & many would argue absolutely not, but To Me??????? alas, yes

[haute-honey]

astro obs.

🤸🏽‍♀️ Libras are always expected to give others something. Others always seem to look to them to give them their time, energy, love, affection, hell even their life. Of course they have issues with people pleasing because people naturally want to take take take from them. When they try to establish boundaries, all hell breaks loose leading them to never try to establish them again.

🤸🏽‍♀️ Speaking of Libra, I'm seeing a lot of posts about how *gay* we are lol Which made me wonder and think back on all the times I've had other women who I thought I was in true platonic friendships with fall head over heels in love with me and admit their true feelings to me. First time it happened I was literally in 4th grade.... How do we hetero Libras turn the gayness off or are y'all going off of what is stereotypically gay?

🤸🏽‍♀️ Libra rising are indecisive because when they make a hasty decision or impulsive decision, 9 times out of 10 it blows up in their face. Let them take their time dammit!

🤸🏽‍♀️ + libra rising kids not only experience bullying/jealousy/evil eye from their peers, they'll even experience it from full grown adults.

🤸🏽‍♀️ I saw someone mention that not liking 6th house synastry is because you enjoy toxicity in relationships...and I disagree. I think 6th house synastry depends on the type of relationship and the sign that it is in. For me, the 6th house works more for friendships and professional relationships rather than romantic relationships. As a straight woman, the sign my 6h is in is not ideal for a relationship for me due to other placements in my chart.

🤸🏽‍♀️ Furthermore, what synastry works for you best or what synastry you find to be most romantic is based on you and your chart. Don't let any of these "astrology girlies" pump your head up with bs just because it works for them.

🤸🏽‍♀️ Fellow scorpio placements (esp you scorpio suns) I'm gonna hold your hand when I say this, someone making you aware when you're exhibiting toxic/bad behavior does not equate to them being unloyal or betraying you. You need people around you that'll hold you accountable for the fucked up shit you do sometimes. No, it doesn't make them a snake or mean that they don't love you but my god, get a grip girl and be so motherfuckingly forreal.

🤸🏽‍♀️ Aquarius men aren't the challenge yall think they are... they're just detached. If that is not your style of love, move along.

🤸🏽‍♀️ Lilith energy is for women/feminines. If you are looking at Lilith through a synastry chart, the one who holds that power when it comes to how Lilith is placed is the feminine in the equation (if there is one). Men/masculines are subdued by Lilith. Not the other way around. For example, if a man's Lilith conjuncts a woman's Venus, he won't be able to use that power over her because he will not connect to it and will not know how to use it.

🤸🏽‍♀️ It is SO FUNNY when I read other observations on Libra placements. Its either we are mean girls/bullies or we are fake/people pleasers lmfao As someone with a lot of prominent Libra placements and influence, I have always had to deal with the fake allegations or the bitchy/intimidating mean girl allegations. Its like if we're not kissing ass we are the meanest bitches but if we are trying to make an effort to please everyone, we are people pleasing fake ass bitches 😆 I need y'all to pick a side and stay there when addressing Libras.

🤸🏽‍♀️ To say a venusian ruled person (Libra/Taurus suns, risings, venus) is a copy cat is laughable because they are the ones getting their swag stolen or having people wanting to be their friends to siphon their aura/vibe. Ex: Cleopatra a Taurus sun (Venus) had her "friend" copy her entire style/aesthetic.

🤸🏽‍♀️ I applaud the female/feminine Libras who have given up on pleasing others and have taken on the bitch allegations with pride because fuck these people. Y'all are weirdos who expect pretty women to fit into whatever box you feel like they should to appease your own self esteem. Seek help.

🤸🏽‍♀️ Degrees absolutely have effects on the natal chart and don't let anyone tell you otherwise! You might resonate more with whatever sign rules over the degree of your sign or rising rather than the actual sign that sit in those placements.

🤸🏽‍♀️ I saw someone say that a unevolved Sagittarius man is scared of sex........... while that could be true they are more often than not sexual deviants when unevolved.

🤸🏽‍♀️ Speaking of sagittarius, Jupiter ruled people quite literally NEED Jupiter to help them out and provide them with more luck than the rest of us because these people are the ultimate self sabotagers. They love trouble, they enjoy creating chaos often then not. And Jupiter is always there to put out the fires they start.

🤸🏽‍♀️ You can't really tell anyone what synastry is best for romantic relationships vs which ones you deem worse because at the end of the day it is all about preferences. If you like a familial feel to your relationships, you'll probably like 4th house synastry. However, if you're like me and come from a veryyyy dysfunctional family, 4h synastry will repulse you. So figure out your own vibe and what you like in a relationship and go from there.

🤸🏽‍♀️ Women with prominent sagittarius placements often are seen by outsiders as the "cool" or "fun" moms when really they can be verrrrrry neglectful towards their children. Ask me how I know lol

🤸🏽‍♀️ Saw someone say that Scorpio sun and moon placements can be backhandedly bully people and this is when I have to bring up the issues of generalization when y'all are making these "observation" posts. Any placement has the potential to be a bully. Literally any of them. However, why Scorpio sun and/or moon might stand out is because they can be LETHAL with their words (ex. Tia Kemp - Scorpio sun). Like they really know how to cut somebody up with their words and they are QUICK with it. Kind of like a scorpion with their tail. So be mindful and don't take it there with them if you can't keep up because you'll need therapy after they get done with you.

🤸🏽‍♀️ Scorpio moon women are either resenting other women or being resented by other women. It can go either way.

🤸🏽‍♀️ Gemini women are the ladies that look a mess 99% of the time and I like that about them.

[yandere-fics]

♡ How Alpha Sister Nora Marks Her Omega ♡

You wished you had been smarter and realized the signs of courtship from the very beginning but considering Nora was the only alpha you ever consistently spent time with, you never realized what she was doing were things alpha's did with omegas they would like to mark and mate with. Even if you had more experience with other alpha's you still wouldn't have likely jumped to the conclusion that it was romantic and not platonic behaviors she was exhibiting, you'd have to be a complete weirdo to assume right off the bat that your sister leaving her items in your nest was out of a desire to mate you and not out of misguided attempt to make sure you had something familiar in your nest when you didn't feel well, not understanding that this was not something typically done between family members and you allowing this first attempt only made Nora begin to grow bolder. You never expected her to grow this bold however.

"I need to mark you tonight." You were having a good night you thought, Nora hadn't said anything weird yet which was a big accomplishment because usually once a day she said something that almost crossed the line from just sisterly affection but honestly this one went way over the line... She couldn't really be serious could she? There was no way, it had to be a joke, or that was what you had thought before you turned to look at her and saw the big smile on her face, the more determined Nora was for something to occur, the more she smiled, perhaps as a way of disarming you so she could have her way but it really freaked you out having to see her massive fangs after she had just talk about marking.

"T-that's a joke right, Nora?" She frowned slightly before resuming her big smile, a small growl leaving her mouth that she quickly covered with a small giggle.

"I know you're scared to be marked cause my teeth are so big, so as the responsible alpha in our relationship, I was told by another alpha, it's my job to hold you down and help you overcome that fear." And just like that you were out of the kitchen, no way in fuck was that happening, you were just going to cool off in your room and in the morning maybe Nora would realize how disgusting and insane of an idea it would be for her to mark her own sister. Sure she called you her omega all the time but you assumed she just meant the omega who was under her protection and eventually when you met another alpha she would stop saying things like that.

"Omega open the door, I hate breaking things in our apartment." There was no way you were going to open the door but you also knew if she was threatening to break your bedroom door down she'd likely get even more riled up and then it would be impossible to talk her down from her rampage, the last time she broke something inside your apartment you had gotten the scent of another alpha on you and so she had tried to drag you to the shower and when you refused to let her shower you to make sure the sent was gone, she broke the bathroom door, she backed down right after though when she saw how scared you looked.

"If I open it you have to agree to not mark me." She growled, the door coming down in a split second, as soon as she stepped into your room she put back on that same fake sweet smile, her fangs dripping with saliva, probably at the thought of ripping your fucking throat out with those massive terrifying things, no way were those going in your neck! Never ever ever!

"You're my reason for living, I promise I'll be so gentle about this." Sure it was gentle for her but she was a giant apex alpha, gentle for her was still terrifying to you and the biggest problem was that she was literally your sister and you were not dating her! As you thought that though you realized you were literally cowering in your nest that was filled with her scented items at the moment, usually that would count as courting. As you realized in disgust you'd been letting her court you, she took that moment to sink her teeth into your neck, growling in pleasure and causing you to realize if her teeth were this big other part were probably huge, there was no way you were going to survive this relationship.

[stvrpst]

The amusing part about the whole “shipwar” issue was how bummy shippers painted buddie shippers as these nasty individuals who had no business being upset or furious.

Like any other fandom, I acknowledge that there are people in this one who are utterly repulsive and say questionable things, but what bothers me about the bummies, is how they exaggerated the situation. Because, in my opinion, what I saw when the shit was going down was actually very mild.

Like I genuinely have seen worse.

Now, personally, I never liked Tommy and was never neutral about him. I've been here since the beginning of the show, and I've seen that little dick behave like a racist, misogynistic jerk. So, no, I've never cared for him and never will.

Obviously, my natural reaction to other people's displeasure with Tommy's set-up was not to be upset. Because, as I previously stated, he has treated members of the 118 with such contempt. I thought it was very understandable that people disliked him.

But the way the bummies made it seem like not liking Tommy was a forbidden sin, and then couldn’t comprehend why people viewed liking Tommy—again, a racist/misogynistic man—as a bad thing was wild.

Of course people are gonna think you’re a weirdo for liking him, SOLEY because he kissed Buck, and then dismissing his shitty behavior- behavior that is sadly a lot of women and people of colors reality that they have to deal with everyday.

I was not surprised to find out that the vast majority of people justifying Tommy’s behavior were white people, cuz they LOVEEE dismissing shit like this for no reason. As long as it’s not an issue that affects them.

It is weird and bad that you would want Buck to be with a racist and sexist man with no redeeming qualities, just to satisfy your mlm desire. But, nah, let's be furious at the ones who have legitimate reasons to despise that dick.

And then making it seem like we didn't care about bucks bisexuality because we didn't agree with the idea of that dick stick being bucks LI? We didn't want Buck with that dick because we care deeply about his bisexuality and believe he deserves to explore himself with someone other than a huge fat bitch.

Somehow they managed to twist it and accuse us of homophobia.

I have never understood, and I never will, the pressure on others to like Tommy. That, in particular, was the most perplexing thing to me, and it helped me to realize that not everyone can think rationally.

Because there are valid reasons for people to detest a character, how are you going to get upset and start saying stupid shit just because people don’t like Tommy, because he engaged in behaviors that women and people of color experience in real life?

But all they had to say was

(1). “Y’all don’t care about bucks bisexuality”

(2). “Buddies are homophobic”

(3). “Let people ship who they want!”

(4). “Let us enjoy this!”

Over some asshole too.

They actually acted as if others were jumping them for no reason. They genuinely couldn't get how jumping ship because your favorite dude kissed a racist, misogynistic man and not exhibiting ANY concern that he kissed a RACIST, MISOGYNIST MAN just because Buck got to kiss a man is fetishistic as fuck.

They acted like the victims the entire time because people refused to tolerate it. So they altered their argument to "we jumped ship because of buddies behavior," and to this day I'm still trying to figure out what behavior they claimed was so terrible other than the fact that people were calling all their asses for being so fucking odd.

They were apart of the buddie shipper fandom weeks ago. They were apart of the group that “ran Oliver off twitter.” They were apart of the group that “ran the women off the show.” Crazy how when they were apart of the fandom, they didn’t speak up about the shit they’re not pulling out of their asses.

But now that they’ve jumped ship, oh it’s a big issue now.

And it’s so funny because they constantly tell on themselves all the time😭 the jokes be writing themselves.

“I didn’t jump ship because Buck kissed a man, I jumped because he was finally happy.” But when I go on your tumblr, Bree, to go see some of the support you showed when Buck was with Taylor since he was happy then too, I don’t see it? Why is that? So you just pick and choose when bucks happy right? As long as it fits your narrative right?

“Buck and Eddie are not co parents” but when I scroll down 5 months ago, everybody and their moms was calling Chris Bucks son and Buck a dad/second father figure.

“Eddies not a good dad/person” but you have Buckleydiaz as your username?

“We didn’t like Bucks other LI because they had no chemistry or build” but when Tommy pulled up out of ass crack with zero chemistry or build up, y’all still folded.

“Eddies a bad friend!” Yet, when I scrolled down your profile, all your asses were buddie shippers regardless.

“We didn’t like Taylor because she was bad.” Yet, tommy has treated members of the 118 like shit just like Taylor, in fact, maybe even worse. They both have treated members on the 118 horribly, interesting how they’re only excusing one of them tho. I wonder why.

They’re a bunch of losers I swear, and the vast majority of them are a bunch of old hags beefing with minors/young adults online over a damn fictional ship. Shits embarrassing. (No offense to all the good older people in the fandom, ily<3)

That weirdo Bree literally has kids and she’s out here triflin over a ship and going at it with literal teenagers. Get your shit together and maybe start putting food on your kids table because I know they’re hungry. you’re a whole grown ass messing with teens/young adults whose frontal lobes aren’t even fully developed while your kids are starving at home.

They would be so much more bearable if they literally didn’t try to dismantle every single dynamic between Buck and Eddie every single day.

And for no reason at all too. They want bucktommy endgame because they’re a bunch of fetishistic weirdos, and we want buddie for Actual LOGICAL reasons that makes sense and has substance.

Not only that, let’s not forget how

(1.) when Ryan Guzman did that podcast, talking about is mental health and past suicidal thoughts, a bunch of them were in the comments saying they wished he would’ve went through with killing himself.

You don’t have to be a fan of Ryan, and it’s 100% understandable if you’re not, but to fucking wish death upon a real living fucking person is disgusting, and suicide at that.

(2.) they decided to justify Tommy’s behavior by calling us ableist and claiming he’s autistic. I cannot even put into words how weird and nasty that is. Like you actually have to be dumb as fuck to go that low and justify an assholes obvious disinterest and behavior and double it down to “autism.”

Even if he was autistic—which he’s not—that doesn’t justify anything? You can be autistic and still be racist and misogynistic. That’s the shit y’all love to pull. The first time, they said Tommy’s behavior was justified because he was a closeted gay. When they realized people weren’t falling for that shit, they tried to switch it over and call us ableist and claim he was autistic.

It’s actually funny cuz it’s the complete opposite, cuz to associate shitty behavior to be autistic is so unbelievably ignorant.

(3.) They decided to contact and invade Tim’s privacy multiple times to the point Tim had to make it known that he only responds to not be rude.

(4.) They started bullying Oliver stark for not posting about bucktommy to the point that Oliver ended up allegedly blocking someone who asked why he wasn’t talking about it. (Which proves they were the mfs who ran Oliver off twitter)

(5.) They started to actually ship Lou and Oliver, two real life people.

(6.) They told people not to participate or donate to a charity event that was helping the people in Gaza just because one the mods in the server didn’t like bucktommy.

(7.) They thought it was okay to speak on Ryan and his characters identity claiming he was white and doubling him down to just that, while trying to erase his Mexican identity saying he wasn’t Mexican(he is.)

(8.) They started harassing journalists because they only mainly talked about buddie when they have stated multiple times that they’re buddie shippers, always have been even before tommy showed up and Oliver and Ryan have no issues discussing buddie anyways.

(9.) Completely dismissed the idea of having an openly queer MEXICAN character for other Latino/hispanic people to relate to because it would get in the way of their ship.

(10.) Called fans/stans of Eddie Diaz—a main Mexican character— “beanstalks.”

I’m still so shocked about this one because it was so unbelievably racist, and the person who came up with it is disgusting.

I’m sorry to any Mexican fans who had to witness that.

(If you’re confused, just to clarify, there is a slur used against Mexicans that starts with bean and ends with an er. Since Eddie is Mexican, they thought it would be funny to give Eddie fans an extremely racist under-toned nickname, hence “beanstalks” :/ )

(11.) They love to weaponize Ryan’s past actions as a way to deflect from the fact that Lous ass is just as fucking bad, but in reality don’t actually give a shit about what Ryan did or said and are only bringing it up to use Ryan’s past shitty behavior to deflect Lous shitty ass. Which is literally insane and stupid.

The list goes on. Yet buddie shippers are the bad ones, okay.

[ivanttakethis]

heyyyyyyy thoughts on the concept of yandere ivan? sorry that recent art made me think about it and I am very curious about your thinking on that (feel free to answer on private as well if you want) i hope you are doing well and having a good day! remember to drink water >:0

Hey hey, I’m going to be 100% honest and say I didn’t even catch the word yandere in the caption of that art post at first. I just saw Ivan looking hot and reblogged it immediately lmao

As for my thoughts on Yandere Ivan, I don’t think he meets all of the requirements to be a yandere.

Sure, he thinks about Till to the point where it’s fair to call it obsessive, and he definitely did some questionable shit when they were younger to get Till’s attention, but that’s just half of a yandere.

Ivan is missing the violent and immoral behavior.

As far as we know he hasn’t been violent with anyone else close to Till, like Mizi or Sua. He doesn’t even view Mizi (who Till is clearly in love with) as a threat to he and Till’s “relationship”.

And Ivan hasn’t exhibited any violence toward Till since they were kids.

The blood licking thing was definitely weird (and kinda freaky), but not violent or immoral.

He’s also not possessive of Till like we see with an archetypal yandere.

The message in Black Sorrow is basically Ivan saying: “I love you but I know it isn’t returned and that’s okay, as long as I can still stay in your life somehow.”

A yandere character wouldn’t be content with this dynamic. They wouldn’t settle for anything less than being the only person in their love’s life.

Even if it that requires physically or emotionally hurting the person they’re in love with. Because yanderes really only care about satisfying their own feelings. Sometimes it’s not even about the object of their supposed affection.

For Ivan, it was the other way around. He was so caught up in thinking about Till’s feelings and making sure Till was safe/cared for that he didn’t care about himself.

In my opinion, Ivan is less of a yandere and more of a lovestruck weirdo with freak tendencies.

Thank you for the reminder to drink some more water! And Alien Stage Friday gave me more Ivan content so today will be a good day 😌

[cairoscene]

Headcanon C -> khoa ?

i think this is asking for the third one but i'm going to take the opportunity to do all the headcanons for khoa hehe

realistic: khoa does not know and does not care about bruce's kids. which ones are adopted, which ones aren't, which are honorary, what their vigilante names are, what they look like etc. he simply could not care less. sends bruce a dick pic after 4 months of not speaking only for bruce to be like bruce: ?????? bruce: I'm at a parent-teacher conference. khoa: what, are you a teacher now? bruce: I'm the parent??

not realistic but hilarious: khoa doesn't know any of the kids, except tim. i've talked about this before but khoa loves tim. he thinks he is such a little weirdo. i think tim has a certain "at any minor inconvenience i will become the supervillain to end all supervillains" energy that khoa deeply admires and wants to encourage.

heart-crushing and awful, but fun to inflict on friends: this is less of a headcanon and more of a bone i have to pick with canon, but khoa is not a psychopath; but he has latched on to the diagnosis he received and uses it to explain the alienation he experiences from other people. diagnosing an 8 year old child a psychopath is a pretty wildly unethical thing to do, considering we still just don't know a lot when it comes to child psychology. children can exhibit traits like lack of empathy, lack of remorse, low impulse control, antisocial behavior etc but the immediate diagnosis is not psychopathy. and bc of social stigma, such a diagnosis at such a young age would do more damage to him. i get what canon was trying to do here: create a character who is bruce's foil in so many ways. since bruce cares so much and has such empathy, let's make a psychopath be his best friend, someone who has no empathy. but khoa does have empathy, particularly toward bruce. this is turning in to more of a rant but the headcanon is: khoa isn't a psychopath. he was prematurely diagnosed one, and it has since informed what he tells himself he can and can't have, which is why he so often self-sabotages his relationship with bruce and keeps himself at such a distance from everyone else.

unrealistic, but I will disregard canon about it because I reject canon reality and substitute my own: khoa made his peace with the fact that bruce's mission was going to get him killed, back when he first discovered he wanted to kiss bruce in paris 19XX but really, khoa will do anything to prevent that death from happening. through all the years and their various turf wars and skirmishes, all of their ideological differences and arguments, khoa has secretly enmeshed himself into bruce's life so the moment it looks like bruce is finally going to sacrifice himself to his cause, khoa can be there to stop him, consequences be damned. he'll be there to pull bruce back by the cowl and put him back in his place, just like he did when they were little more than children, and bruce will have to live with the knowledge that he doesn't get to die. his life is in khoa's hands. this is unrealistic bc DC will continue to kill bruce off whenever they want and they will forget and frankly already have forgotten about khoa but i never will <3

[send me a character and i'll tell you headcanons]

[my-gf-is-kazuichi-soda]

Some people in the MLAATR fandom act like Sheldon is irredeemably creepy or gross or manipulative, and then uses examples of behavior that happens with all of the characters because it's an exaggerated children's cartoon.

Exhibit A:

To me, this is the same logic as saying "Jon Arbuckle is an animal abuser" because he lets Garfield drink coffee and sometimes puts him on a diet of a single lettuce leaf (I read the Jon Arbuckle hateblog for a laugh sometimes). Yes, obviously irl this would make someone an animal abuser, but in the silly world of Garfield these are just signifiers that the human reader, who might drink coffee or be on a diet that they hate, is supposed to relate to Garfield. Neither of these actually foods hurt him in the comic. Garfield eats entire trays of lasagna for crying out loud! Jim Davis even describes Garfield as being more like "a person in a cat suit" than a real cat. If we put the actions back in the context of the comic strip, Jon Arbuckle is just a pet owner who sometimes acts as a parent to a child, other times acts as Garfield's friend or roommate, and is kind of a dork but generally a good guy. Garfield and Odie's family.

Likewise, the world of MLAATR operates on cartoon/sitcom logic. Very often the characters will resort to lying, trickery, disguises, being aggressively friendly, etc. as ways to keep the plot and jokes rolling. I'm pretty sure every character has done this at some point, because of the humor potential. These are not meant to be looked at as abusive behaviors. You can usually judge how harsh the actions were based on other characters' reactions and how quick they are to forgive at the end rather than applying real-world relationship logic.

This is not to say that the writing is infallible or unable to be criticized because "it's just a kid's cartoon!" (I hate that argument, it's usually meant to silence people and that's not what I'm trying to do). Yes, cartoons can screw up in their messages, and you might be able to argue that maybe this writing style makes all of the characters bad role models for children. But if this is how you judge Sheldon, it's only fair to hold all the other characters in the same standards, including Jenny herself.

It bothers me that Sheldon gets the bad rep in the fandom because as an autistic person, especially when I was an autistic child, I related to both Jenny and Sheldon and their struggles in communicating/socializing in a world that glorifies popularity and being "normal" and hurts the weirdos to get them to conform. So it hurts on a personal level to see Sheldon get hated to such a high degree, and to hear people say Sheldon and Jenny would be an inherently unhealthy relationship, just because Sheldon can have some boundary issues and lack of social skills. I know people aren't saying this to villainize autistic traits, but that's how it can feel to me.

I could also get into how the show hinted that Jenny was at least a little curious about a relationship with Sheldon and that she might have gone for it if not for her fatal flaw in trying to seek popularity, but I'll save that for another post. This isn't meant to shame those who dont like the Jenny and Sheldon ship, but to give an alternative perspective to the whole "Sheldon is creepy!" thing I keep seeing in the fandom.

[helipackjack]

In honor of autism acceptance week, let's go over some canonically shown signs of Jack being autistic.

Special interest- robotics. He also has bursts of shorter term hyperfixations, such as his movie. He also fixates on Chase Young like a celebrity special interest.

Certain tasks considered complicated by many are easy for him, yet some tasks most others do with ease are hard for him. His way of thinking and logic deviates from the standard too.

He has trouble talking to people and expressing himself. He often fumbles over his words and has things come out the opposite of what he was trying to say. This often earns him a scolding or weird look.

Jack is canonically implied to practice his facial expressions and lines, almost like he has to manually do his expressions and perform for others, though rather than masking, he just puts on his evil persona. He also has stress induced facial tics

His monologing. He does this often, speaking to himself. It's a result of his loneliness, but I think this would have happened either way, just at a lesser scale.

He treats objects like they have feelings. Heck, he gave them feelings.

This is extrapolating a bit, but how easily he gets riled up, to the point of even having certain words set him off without fail. When Ashley says his parents and the party guests were calling him a weirdo, he has a violent reaction, shouting "What's so weird about me!?" I believe it's a result of repressed emotions regarding his earlier childhood, before he turned evil. Even if it was never said, he was definitely severely bullied at school, in part due to his autism, and he was called weird for just being himself and exhibiting autism symptoms, exhibiting behavior that to him, is normal and natural, just trying to go through life and maybe make friends. This being attacked just for existing caused being called weird to be sensitive topic to him, and convinced him that he'll never be good enough no matter how hard he tries to be good, so he turned to evil.

Now to more lighthearted stuff

Yippee!

The little small sounds he makes sometimes just because. Just his vocal stims in general.

This.

Season 3 made a brainless joke of him but this scene was so good. He was stimming here. Stimming for the sake of it cause it makes him happy. I relate to this so much.

The scene where Jack had the monkey staff for the first time and jumped around his lab, we all wanted to do that, bounce off the walls.

He loves charts and spreadsheets, to the point he went to update it first thing after seeing Mala Mala Jong.

Him sitting like this

And last, the pangolin collection

[skxrbrand]

what happened?

If you were here last year, you might remember me alluding to a user in the community who was sort of giving me grief behind the scenes. That was The-Blackened-Dove / Shiloh / Whatever their name is. They have a callout post circulating.

Without getting too in the weeds (and because they've hurt people far more than me), we were mutuals for about seven hours and within that seven hours, they pretty much started exhibiting Fucking Weirdo™️ behavior right off the bat. They had no ability to tell in character from out of character (Skarbrand had expressed disgust at their character and they asked me if that was ME, the mun, expressing my opinions on their OC) and I decided to soft-block them for it. They then decided to vaguepost (two weeks after the fact) about me and just generally do the whole "im a victim and I was hurt" thing even though I did nothing to them at all.

I DID apologize (I sent my apology through Slurk because I did NOT want to talk directly to them) because I can be brusque and they denied any kind of accountability, said they could've called me out for what I did, and just generally made it sound like I treated them so awfully.

They then went on a smearing campaign behind the scenes, talking shit about me to their friends on discord, who all proceeded to block me.

I'm glad they're gone. But, I'm more hopeful that the people that were lied to about me / given ultimatums will come back around and give me a proper chance. I'm not a bad person.

I just don't put up will bullshit.

[dersitedreamr]

Bulleted list on Dave traits/behaviors mostly just how i perceive him and as reference for me as a dave-enjoyer but maybe could resonate with any of u ranges from having canon basis to no/little canon basis:

Actually not an idiot and is smart.

On that topic not a big reader but clearly some1 who likes to learn as much as he can about any given topic (especially if it relates to his interests or whatever is most important at the time)

A dickhead for sure lol

Not as emotionally/socially stunted as fandom likes to push?? Exhibits a fair amount of emotional intelligence sometimes more than others around him??

Sappy as fawwwwkk (refer to his bday letter to john pls)

Incredibly loyal and caring. Def a ride or die kind of friend

capable of being serious. Between rose he is usually the first to Be Serious and cut through the BS (in regards to like. Emotional situations w/e)

Kay rest under cut

a bit of a freak a bit of a weirdo . Jus a lil

idk if this is like a trait or just a result of his role in HS but some1 who is willing to take up lots of heavy responsibility and face the consequences if its for the best. Usually wants to do it OVER others so he can spare others from having to deal with the same struggle.

Is a complete actual geek/hobbyist/nerd when it comes to his interests and knows everything there is to know. (Photography interest, dark room for film development)

His knowledge is a hodgepodge of sitting and forcing himself to actually read a manual and saying fuck it we ball

Quote he lives by: this is so fucking stupid wouldnt it be funny if i took it seriously and made the best stupid thing ever.

Certified Internet Person . Twitter Addict and Blog Runner.

Has a mean streak where he likes to make fun of ppl he thinks are stupid/annoying by making them think theyre/he is “in” on the joke when they are in fact the punchline. (Rose is like this too)

dead pan as fuuuuck tells a joke and doesnt smile. Doesnt laugh at other peoples jokes even if he thinks theyre funny.

Def doesnt like ppl who are loud/noisy ornery or really nit-picky/fussy. So like dont be in his business or checking over his shoulder or freaking out over every minor thing

[rigginsstreet]

It’s always really funny to me when people act shocked/upset when an actor exhibits weirdo behavior, to whatever extent minor or major, cuz it’s like…look at the profession of acting as a whole. Look at what actors are asked to do in any given movie/television show/play. No normal person seeks that shit out like if all your screws are tight you are not tryna be an actor.

[stardyng]

Might I ask how that anon reconciles being a supporter of the patriarchy as they obv think Alicent and Sansa are while... simultaneously being ""woke""? 💀 Do they just throw as many negative words as they can to anyone they don't like and see what best sticks?

Basically they're simultaneously trying to shame the characters themselves for their traditionally feminine personality traits and specific roles in life, and the fans for presenting all these traditional elements as ''actually woke''. They believe that what fans of these characters are doing is reaffirming regressive patriarchal and conservative standards (AKA ''female characters should be traditionally feminine, passive, submissive, not exhibit masculine traits and not be sexually promiscuous) and presenting that in a ''woke'' way. Essentially, anon is basically doing the equivalent of what they're accusing us of doing, shaming certain types of inoffensively written female characters based on regressive standards in order to reaffirm the type of female characters that they like. They were very counterproductive since the description they used to shame Sansa and Alicent fit the female characters they were defending just as much (except swap red hair with incestuous blonde) because, as I explained in my post, they are all victims of a patriarchal abusive society that forced all of them into certain ''passive'' and/or ''submissive'' roles for years or decades, though as I stated before, it's none of their fault. Anon was being sexist and regressive in their attempt to present us and the characters we stan as that. It reminds me of Alicent antis who apparently dislike her for her supposed ‘’sexism’’ and then refer to her using sexist terms and slurs. Genuinely makes no sense. But basically, yeah, they're essentially in the process of figuring out what sequence of words to use in order to add an immediately conservative and sexist connotation to being a fan of a type of female character that they don't like. All around ''weirdo'' behavior.

[thepowerisyouth]

Hot take: if a person agrees that logic is a generally correct problem solving methodology, and yet fails to deny any of these postulates as true, then they will have to accept capitalism is inherently 'evil', and that a collectivism is the only way to not literally all die in the anthropocene.

Yes, that statement implies I am attempting to write a mathematical/scientific proof which can undeniably be used to deconstruct every capitalist argument. Deal with it. Still a draft, but I'm posting because its already long. Feel free to give suggestions. No, please give me suggestions

I actually believe this might work, because convincing irrational people that their arguments are fallacies is bascially what cognitive behavioral therapy is all about

Content included in discussion: death, sustainability, good, evil, (more to come)

1. All life is precious.

-Precious can be defined different ways but its important to use this term, and I think to me what it means is that we must grieve any loss of life. Grief is not easily defined, but this is an absolute rule to follow.

Precisely defining grieve as the philosophy sees it is on my to-write list

-Its still not clear what life is either, so when doubt exists we should assume something is alive. This is because I really believe it's a fallacy, a punch to the face, to deny public discourse its chance to run its course if there is any shadow of a doubt. Science believes all answers must be sought out over a period of time, and to never stop questioning

------------

2. All 'non-life' is precious too

-because every resource is, in fact, finite in the universe. And we want to keep sustaining the entire universe as long as possible so we should assume every resource is absolutely finite in case there is any shadow of a doubt of a resource being 'infinite'.

-this argument, for purposes of this argument, is not seeking to define life. Atoms seem to me like they are also alive, okay? I think its more about using what most people can commonly understand as life, and reinforcing that both are precious. Its just easier for people to agree that 'life' is precious first, than use that first assumption to prove this second one

-we can prove that 'non-life', as might be commonly defined, is inherently essential to our survival. Best evidence is global warming, so a million things to go on there.

I believe these arguments prove we can apply our argument of things being 'precious' to 'non-life', using our 1st postulate and knowledge of the universe, as well as effects of global warming, to prove the 2nd postulate is true too

------------------

If all life is precious, and we grieve, it really starts to raise some 'why' questions, doesnt it?

------------------

3. Homo sapien sapiens are inherently empathetic creatures, and so are other animals that exhibit provable signs of empathy

-Defining empathy is hard. What's hard is that we all know what it feels like to 'experience' empathy, but feelings are hard to communicate. Will come back to this

- It is possible, although not proven, that because of genetic mutations a person might possibly be born without actual empathy.

-Christians call this type of person the anti-christ, a literal spawn of satan. Does the literal spawn of satan exist on earth? We don't know, we haven't proven it yet.

-Ive thought a lot about if my 3rd postulate should be thrown out by basis of example of people being, well. Fucking 'evil' with their actions. People make me sick sometimes.

-But I think it's important to at least acknowledge for arguments sake that a baby cannot be evil. That would be a scary goddamn baby. Humans are not, by 'nature', an 'evil creature'

In case some weirdo says a baby is evil-- It is a fallacy to believe a baby is born evil, because if all 'evil' people should be 'locked up' as I think most people would agree, than believing a baby is evil would make a person argue for locking babies up.

That notion sounds fucking evil to me dude idk about you

--------------

So-- why do humans act evil if they are not born evil? (Such as my hypothetically baby-locking-up person)

--------------

4. Homo sapien sapien's are capable of learning to be 'evil' as basically any point from birth until death, but at varying speeds of learning of course

-I have to define evil now. That's hard. What's even harder is that we all know what evil feels like. I think theres probably a million evil things in the world I can point out. All of those things would be evidence that there is evil in the world, however it would not give us a framework for determining evil

- I'm actually going to come back to this one. I think I'm satisfied, for now, in saying that most people who read this will know, intuitively, what evil feels like

-I guess I should double back and reinforce that my #4 postulate is true by example. Humans are not born evil, but we do see evil humans in the world, therefore, it follows that humans must learn at some point in their life to be evil

‐----------

5. Humans can learn to be 'good'

-Same issue with defining 'good' as with 'evil'. Yatta yatta, we all know what good feels like, I'll finish defining the framework later in the argument & fix this quick explanation later

-If someone doesnt support this notion, than they must also support the notion that 'therapy doesnt work', or more specifically, that there is such thing as a person who is 'untreatable' by therapy

-I do not believe the above is true, that a person 'cant change', and trust me when I say I am soooo confident about this. My proof is by example: "have you ever met a person ever, who didnt change in any way"?

-Because if you have not ever met such a person, as in a person who has never, ever changed their belief once, than there is no evidence by example that any person 'cant change'.

Every person you have ever met, that has changed at least once, is a key bit of evidence in support of postulate #5. Without evidence of people who have never changed, it becomes clear where the majority of evidence lies.

--------------

6. Being efficient is better for society than being non efficient

-i felt weird just writing that down and thinking someone would disagree-- but here we are in the year-of-our-lord-arguing-2024

- I dont feel like justifying this postulate now, but I need to soon because it's one of the pieces of my proof

-evidence by example is the way to go here. If you pick the right examples, it would be really hard for a person to obviously, sensibly tell you that 'more waste' is better than 'less waste'.

‐-----------

7. Collective intelligence is greater than individual intelligence

-mountains of evidence-- democracy being everyone's easiest to think about, if they dont already agree

-heres my thought-experiment evidence:

-"Is it possible, that if we sent a human baby out in space, never to interact with us again, that it would figure out all of scientific thought? Every single advancement in science would be re-created by this baby in a spaceship?"

-"no, that is probably impossible. It is almost certain that baby would die within its first week, and definitely unimaginable to assume this baby would figure out its way back to earth and be the greatest thinker to ever exist"

-I argue that if you believe that an individual always knows better than a collective, you must also support my idea of an evil-genius-spaceship-baby

-that should clear up most dissent to this 7th postulate

---------

---------

Time to get even wilder. I was raised Christian. I am not anymore. Please forgive me for using only Christian terms I'm familiar with for this next discussion. I'm trying to reconcile the ideals of Christians with the ideals of socialism.

I do think most of the Christian ideals are logical, and common sense. That is to say that these ideals reconcile with my overall framework here.

I also think theres a few really toxic parts of Christianity that can be scrutinized, and logically thrown out from our philosophical framework under false assumptions or something else. Lets give it a shot

8. No one, single mortal man is 'God' on Earth

-I define God as any being which is 'absolutely omnipotent, all powerful, and of probably infinite lifespan'

-the idea of jesus doesnt break this argument because, as I believe, the ideology goes that Jesus was not 'God' while on Earth, but merely a mortal man who wanted to join God up above. So if anything, believing in Jesus supports this idea because even that fucker wasnt God either while walking the Earth

-For all of us that, like me, arent Christian, let me explain why I believe this argument is still very true to us

-let me say first that I only became comfortable, personally, with a lot of the reasons for why the bible says what it says about God, only when I thought of it this way

-God isnt real. As in, there is not a literal, physical magical wizard flying in space who can wave a wand and make shit happen.

-God is, in fact, a theoretical ideal of what human enlightenment looks like which was thought up several millenia ago, and has since throughout history been misinterpreted (probably from lack of available evidence), and blended with the ideals of 'Satan', or 'Evil'. And I really think, the more I look at it this way, that the more things make sense.

-When you think of God as being the exact same thing as enlightenment idealogy, it helps our postulate by fitting it with the saying "no one is free until we are all free".

------------

-which is to say, no one mortal man is God on earth until we all can become 'Gods' on earth, i.e. fully, absolutely enlightened

-god how well this framework, just, well... works

- Heaven: conceptual place where enlightened society can exist

- Hell: conceptual place where the anti-thesis to enlightened society exists

-Earth: conceptual place where humans learn to become enlightened

Guys lemme just say now-- its becoming clearer and clearer to me that we can actually disprove all non-enlightment ideals as literally "Satanist", and then argue for our point better than most Christians--because it makes logical sense given the additional information, the collective evidence of science & history, which society holds today

-Most 'bad ideals' that christians have make more sense if you think of the fact that every christian institution has been led by a 'prophet', who nobody can actually prove if they are acting in their own self interest, or 'God's'

-time for another postulate number I think

---------

9. It is impossible to prove that such a person exists on Earth who is acting as a 'sole communicator for God', i.e. a prophet

-people say they are prophets all the time. People lie

-actually, you know who lies best? Satan. Satan lies really really well, according to the Bible.

-theres more here to write about. I think I want to expand on the idea that you can prove that the behaviors of a prophet better aligns with Satanist ideals, than Godly ones, because of the withholding of information that is provable among prophets throughout history

-if a prophet does not provide its collective society with all possible information, than it is a fallacy to accept both the principles of an informed democracy, and also that a prophet for 'God' can exist on Earth

-it is NOT a fallacy to support the ideals of democracy and also that a prophet for 'Satan' does exist and it lies to people and says its supporting 'Godly' notion

-it is also NOT a fallacy to support the notion of a facist dictatorship, and also the idea of a prophet for God existing. Important point here that someone can easily hold these two beliefs and they dont contradict each other, unlike with democracy ideals

-guys I just now understood the holy trinity: God (collective intelligence, logic, absolute truth); Holy Spirit (our very valid feelings about our beliefs); Jesus (individuals more enlightened than us, who teach & bring us closer to God)

-however, as I should point out. I am firmly not a christian. I am ex-mormon. I am trying to reconcile the beliefs of a Christian with my own, by dismissing certain beliefs as fallacy, and redefining what I need to, until it works out

-the way I see it, Ive pretty firmly solidified my own notion, that Chrisitan beliefs are firmly socialist. I read the top of my post and realize I still need to finish all the way back up to Capitalism

---------

END OF FIRST POSTULATE SET

Time for supporting evidence of the 'master postulates' of this theorum. I should point out that these bits of evidence are also, in fact, postulates which much be scrutinized under the same framework. However, I am drawing a line as I think the ones about here are more umbrella postulates, while I'm starting to get more specific

6. Global warming is a urgent, life threatening issue to humans

-I mentioned global warming above, so I realized that yes, a person does need to believe in this idea, as its the biggest supporting evidence of postulate #2, which is a key part of my overall argument

-however, a person does not need to say they agree to global warming 'at first glace'. They only need to agree with global warming when its under the definition I use below

-I define global warming, for the sake of this argument, as "human worsened climate". I really think thats a more accurate framing of the issue at hand with global warming.

-So for my argument I only need someone who can agree both that humans are not optimally living in our environment, as in we are 'harming' our environment, and they agree that this is an issue which is starting to affect us every day (natural disasters from weakening jet stream)

-once all of these

Climate is complex, and no one issues creates everything is does, but it is undeniable to me

[callmeahopelesscase]

Tin exhibiting peak weirdo behavior the first few episodes of triage and wondering why Tol won't just trust & believe him is so funny to me actually.

[paldean-ranger-brandy]

These paradox mons are vexing the shit out of me, friendos. They are ending up not just outside the crater, but WELL outside the crater, as far out as Asado Desert and Tagtree Thicket it many cases. Haven't found them farther than that but tbh I suspect it's only a matter of time. The only two causes I can think of are:

These 'mons are escaping and then wandering off on their own for some unknown reason. Or,

There are poachers, competitive/incompetent trainers catching and releasing them when they prove to be too much to handle.

Option 1 isn't super likely. Even though these lads are absolutely weirdos, there's absolutely a method to their madness. And it's super unlikely that we'd be seeing such a wide variety in the species that are making these escapes if it were a behavioral thing- it would be limited only to the species that exhibit that behaviour. But it isn't, it's all of them. And besides that, even though a lot of these mons are fast/strong enough to escape, not one among them is at all sneaky. There's no way they'd be making it as far as they are without being reported unless there was extra human intervention.

But point 2 also is not seeming at all likely. None of these pokemon have any original or previous trainers listed, which is automatically logged and tracked any time a pokemon is caught in a pokeball. We can see a pokemon's full trainer history even after it's released, but none of these mons have ever been caught in a ball. There's no history whatsoever of any interactions with human tech at all. And while it's not unheard of for poachers to avoid using pokeballs to avoid this exact type of tracking, a 'mon this large and strong would pretty much necessitate it. AND Michael and I have found zero evidence of poachers anywhere in the area, aside from the crater rangers and the league.

Man, this mission was not supposed to be a mystery. It was supposed to be just hang with the crater crew, learn about some weird pokemon, maybe knock some poachers around. But nooo, there just has to be something super weird going on that's gonna take me forever to figure out. Ugh.