Foster Nuances Needing Homes. Like A Shelter Pet

I’m not a moderate or a centrist, but I’m getting rather tired of polarization. This includes infighting of similar opinions. Micro-polarization let’s call it. Big fan of ‘these two takes can coexist’ posts. Consensus decision-making is a political structure where multiple viewpoints and interests are allowed input on a final course of action. Not everyone who disagrees with you is out to get you. Stop stressing yourself out.

[adopt-a-nuance]

[teaboot]

I hate you Ozempic craze I hate you 'heroin chic' I hate you weight loss ads on public radio I hate Burn Fat Fast ads every thirty seconds I hate you I hate you I hate you

[adopt-a-nuance]

I’m not liking the Neo-Pro-Ana resurgence either, but to be fair, Ozempic has literally helped some people reclaim their lives. If you’re far above 250 pounds, (not 6 ft tall and not muscular) being overweight can (in some cases) be a legitimately hamper to your day-to-day life.

The goal shouldn’t be “skinny,” but going from your bones and joints constantly hurting to being manageably chubby is a worthwhile trajectory

Don’t oversimplify a complicated topic. 

[silvermoon424]

Bro absolutely COOKED with this.

[ohnoitstbskyen]

If you ever hear the phrase "fascism is aesthetics as politics," that's what this post is talking about.

It's not about being tough on crime, because the absolute toughest most brutal measure you could take against "crime" as a social problem is to alleviate poverty, and increase access to education, healthcare and social mobility.

It's about performing "tough on crime" as an aesthetic by enacting violence against a prop, i.e. minorities and the impoverished, who are fetishized and objectified to represent "crime." They are brutalized as punishment for crime, but never with the purpose of alleviating the problem of crime.

This is why a lot of conservatives and other right wingers can get straight up angry when you suggest things like reform or social measures to reduce crime. They don't want crime to be reduced, they want an eternal war against "crime" because it provides an arena for the righteous to demonstrate virtue by brutalizing their enemies.

[adopt-a-nuance]

While I don’t doubt that some conservatives do not actually believe the party line of “criminals/poors shouldn’t be given handouts” or whatever else, bootstrap yada yada you shouldn’t commit crime under any circumstances but always be a good little worker bee, or you’re a bad person, some of them actually have drunk that Koolaid.

It’s important to know which one you’re dealing with, because of how to approach talking about it.

People whose base motivation is greed, and simply jump on socially acceptable ways to forward it, are slightly different from those who believe with their whole heart that they won the meritocracy race, too.

Some people genuinely are out of touch.

Also relevant to bring up the quote “The opposite of love is not hate, it’s indifference.” Sometimes people who are trained simply not care about the lower class do just pay them no mind. It is not about ‘cruelty’ in the sense of ‘sadism.’ It is about categories passed down of who is worthy of non-indifference and who isn’t.

It’s also good to keep these things in mind for your own mental health. Running on a mental simulation script that the world is largely populated or run by demons who get off on cruelty, as opposed to a lot of human beings who have just been trained to look the other way, is not exactly a great mental space to be in.

(Just look at Alex Jones. /hs)

[elbiotipo]

People on Twitter (and elsewhere) love to say "retard" and "low IQ" now and I'm not only talking about nazi accounts but just your average account. It came out of nowhere just this year too. Really annoying.

[elbiotipo]

I've been telling people that IQ is perhaps the most normalized example of eugenics and the pseudoscience that is psychometrics

[elbiotipo]

Anything that is based in IQ is bogus because IQ is simply fake data

[adopt-a-nuance]

Unfortunately, some of them even crawl their way to Tumblr:

Reblog by @adopt-a-nuance · 2 images

💬 202  🔁 25  ❤️ 32 · Still no response about the bigotry. They clearly only care about themselves, and not other people they’re hurting. Sad

[onion-souls]

The US senate is such a gaggle of old fucks that the old fuck everyone was sure dropped dead last week wasn't even the old fuck that dropped dead last week

[not100bees]

Honestly shout out to Kit Connor. Cooler than that show or fanbase deserves.

[not100bees]

You want to hold a fictional character accountable for hypothetical actions described by the actor playing him?

[pagecommando]

You heard it here. Depiction = "Romanticization" Are we scheduled for a "Thomas the Tank Engine is Fascist" Take next orrr... Like. is that the level of discourse here?

[tuulikki]

I have yet to see “held accountable” from internet discourse mean anything more substantial than “Twitter has a frenzied flurry of irritating dramatic people all agreeing with each other using buzzwords” which I think is why they believe they can hold fictional characters accountable

[adopt-a-nuance]

Guys you do realize that the Tweet you're commenting about EXPLICITLY said "I want this to be a normalization depiction of as-close-to-REAL young people because this is just TEE HEE what REAL young people do, heavily implying it's not a weighty moral issue to betray your sexual partner" Like I'm reading the replies and going, "has . . . has reading comprehension fallen so far that even when someone SAYS in WORDS that something should be NORMALIZED as NORMAL somehow people still stick to the talking points fed to them by fandom???" Like, maybe he still would've portrayed the heartbreak or whatever, but objecting to it being "villainized" gives you not a hint but a blaring signpost of what this person's aim was, that would likely color the tone of the portrayal. Like literally the guy you're defending does not agree with your appraisal that fiction is separate from reality (or?) that they shouldn't reflect each other.

[not100bees]

You know when I screenshotted that tweet I knew that if the post got notes I would be screeched at by all sorts that got mad at me for extremely dumb reasons yet I still made the post. In this way I'm very similar to Jesus Christ. Maybe even better.

[adopt-a-nuance]

If you disagree you could say exactly why (what in his words do you think is misrepresented here?) instead of saying . . . in essence nothing. I'm not mad at you, I'm flabbergasted responders can't understand the very words the Tweet typed. For context: "romanticization" is not the correct word. Treating treating your partner like shit as "normal" is what the problem is. Like this guy. Thinks it's normal. To lie to your partner and put them at elevated risk of STDs. At this point it's even less about the story he wanted to tell and more that he thinks this is an "important" message.

[not100bees]

Honestly shout out to Kit Connor. Cooler than that show or fanbase deserves.

[not100bees]

You want to hold a fictional character accountable for hypothetical actions described by the actor playing him?

[pagecommando]

You heard it here. Depiction = "Romanticization" Are we scheduled for a "Thomas the Tank Engine is Fascist" Take next orrr... Like. is that the level of discourse here?

[tuulikki]

I have yet to see “held accountable” from internet discourse mean anything more substantial than “Twitter has a frenzied flurry of irritating dramatic people all agreeing with each other using buzzwords” which I think is why they believe they can hold fictional characters accountable

[adopt-a-nuance]

Guys you do realize that the Tweet you're commenting about EXPLICITLY said "I want this to be a normalization depiction of as-close-to-REAL young people because this is just TEE HEE what REAL young people do, heavily implying it's not a weighty moral issue to betray your sexual partner" Like I'm reading the replies and going, "has . . . has reading comprehension fallen so far that even when someone SAYS in WORDS that something should be NORMALIZED as NORMAL somehow people still stick to the talking points fed to them by fandom???" Like, maybe he still would've portrayed the heartbreak or whatever, but objecting to it being "villainized" gives you not a hint but a blaring signpost of what this person's aim was, that would likely color the tone of the portrayal. Like literally the guy you're defending does not agree with your appraisal that fiction is separate from reality (or?) that they shouldn't reflect each other.

[thigmatropes]

PSA: if you’re atheist, then good for you.

But don’t assume anyone who believes and experiences otherwise is stupid. Or damaged. Or dysfunctional. How do you handle a Pentecostal telling your about their Spirit encounter or someone telling you about a haunting?

I want you to think about your answer.

Because calling any of these things derogatory names? Not only is that lowkey ableist. And it’s not respecting others’ beliefs. They’re not necessarily suffering for no reason. Your beliefs about the world are valid. But to claim you know for sure what “reality” is, is super arrogant.

https://thigmatropes.tumblr.com/post/640861662147182592/some-tulpa-formers-claim-that-they-can

@jumpinjohnnyjumble

ThigmaTropes

Some tulpa formers claim that they can deliberately place things in their line of sight. So intentional hallucinating. Hallucinating is lite

[jumpinjohnnyjumble]

well, the good news for you is that im not an atheist! and if those are your experiences, great. im not here to tell you your religious experiences or beliefs are invalid.

and super cool of you to call me ableist when you’re the one who wrote a whole essay that’s basically guaranteed to trigger an entire demographic! you must be really smart :)

the problem here is that you wrote a whole multiparagraph thing, on a post about how to help someone actively suffering because of a delusion, trying to say “ohh well it’s not actually bad because it’s real”. like seriously? fuck off. i don’t care what your beliefs are. the problem is when you use that to encourage someone’s delusion that they’re actively upset about and is distressing them!! it’s not that hard!!!!!

[thigmatropes]

I didn’t say they were my experience. I said you’re invalidating others’ experiences. In fact I said what I believed- that these were subconscious fears.

But because I’m not presumptuous, I allow that may not be true.

If the attitude is that you are only able to be safe from demons if you cling to the side of you which people have dictated you to think, then that’s a problem.

Plenty of people are able to be safe from their self-proclaimed ‘demons’ because they find something that works for them.

Existing =/= no ability to be safe.

If you want to mentally hobble people to the point where they can’t even function at the slightest suggestion, then guess what ... you’re not helping people. You’re damaging them.

[jumpinjohnnyjumble]

im going to be honest with you i genuinely have no idea what you’re trying to say anymore.

are you saying that... helping a psychotic person in the ways that, in their first-hand experience, they’ve found to be the most helpful is actually bad for them?? youve lost me. you realize the original post you commented on was made by someone who experiences psychosis, right? like these are their actual firsthand experiences with it? and these aren’t even your beliefs or experiences you’re throwing at me here? im.. bewildered

[thigmatropes]

I’ve been thinking for a while now how to best explain this. Alright, so imagine you told a woman, “if a man attacks you, you are helpless and might as well give up.” Instead of teaching them self-defense.

Why would anyone do that? Well, hopefully they wouldn’t.

Telling people that they have no ability to fend off negative entities the moment they start thinking one could be around is essentially the same thing.

Telling people that the only way they could ever be safe from anything is if they swim back to that island of disbelief when they’re drowning, instead of teaching them how to swim.

We know that humanity, since recorded history, has claimed it is dealing with negative entities. This extends into the present day, where you can go on forums in real time and read stories. Firsthand experiences, in your words. This includes people who have experienced physical pain from these encounters. Now in my own opinion, that’s psychosomatic. But in the interest of arming people with all the possible tools, the mental self-defense, these people would recommend not viewing demons as some unbeatable problem, or to be skirted at all costs, especially when this is almost guaranteed to happen to a psychotic person!!! nor spreading this mindset! But rather viewing them the way these people do: as something that simply exists- something you can ward off.

Whether shaman or saint, New Age or ancient verse, casting away demons is entirely “canon” to the human condition.

If all of these stories were merely the placebo effect ... keep in mind that the placebo effect has saved some individuals from physical, absolutely deadly diseases.

“Spontaneous remission” is a growing field of study. Anyway, back to the point.

People shouldn’t be spreading the outlook that a “belief that a demon is present” should affect someone any more than encountering a bear in the woods. Bears are scary and dangerous, sure, but their body language can also be read, and there are steps to take to ensure the highest possibility of safety. Retaining a little bit of groundedness while under threat is a thing the mind is capable of. Especially if it’s rehearsed.

But picturing warding off a demon, which is something these people practice at, sometimes daily, is, according to what people discussing the subject have told me on Tumblr at least, ironically the very last suggestion anyone here would make. Funny how running from problems is pushed instead of figuring out how to dismantle them.

Ultimately, believing or not believing in demons is up to the lucid mind, when it is out of crisis. Some people take these data points of experience and conclude that something did “really happen.” Others don’t.

But when it is in that mode, equipping it beforehand with positive tools and confidence rather than despair is the goal here. You’re free to not believe in your own experiences, because that’s your choice.

But, as I’ll say again, doctors pushing this conclusion on you, or even other psychotics insisting that they’re not real, is not their call to make!

They think they’re being helpful, when in reality ... they’re just pushing a doubly complicated narrative- that (1) demons do not exist, and you’re not allowed to think so or you’re more disordered, (thats the ableism part) and (2) the only way to deal with them is to not think about them.

Imagine if you approached any other problem in your life by “not thinking about it.” Instead of examining it or preparing for it ... does that make sense yet?

You’re free to think these things don’t exist

but

verbally beforehand treating or thinking of one slip up in the other direction as if it is a housefire, instead of a controllable loaf of bread that happens to be smoldering, seems to be hurting far more people than it’s helping.

As compared to the people doing the steps to manage it, keeping an extinguisher on hand.

[jumpinjohnnyjumble]

did you read the post that this was about? and have you ever been with a psychotic person while they were having an episode?

this isn’t a matter of teaching people how to defend themselves. this is a matter of what, in one’s own personal experience, has proven to help the most. what you’re doing right now is saying “i know this is what helps you, but i’m telling you what i think should help you more”.

and this isn’t about religion. this is about mental illness. there is a distinct difference between someone with that kind of religious connection and someone with psychosis. i’m guessing you don’t have any schizophrenic friends because if you did you would see the distinction there.

using your own analogy here, what you’re doing right now is saying “people are around every corner to attack you”. in this circumstance, it doesn’t matter what you’re saying is a helpful way to go about it, because you’re actively triggering people! do you not see where the problem is here?

im guessing you didn’t read the original post, because if you did you’d know that we’ve already been saying that

• outright telling people their delusions aren’t real isn’t helpful,

• the best way to go about things is to talk people through the delusion as if it was real

you’re not telling us anything we don’t already know, except you’re perpetuating fear along with it. please go back and read the original post again, which, once again, was written by a psychotic person based on their own personal experiences with what is most helpful.

[thigmatropes]

The people whose experiences I keep referencing? They have the mood symptoms of schitzophrenia and other symptoms and some of them have been driven away from seeking help because they kept being told that this aspect of their personal experience was not valid.

They could be benefiting from treatment right now, for other aspects of their problems, if the establishment had not decided to actively malign their beliefs.

To label them as defective.

So I’ll say for a third time or so. It is not your place to decide what is real and what isn’t.

It is not a doctor’s place to decide what is real and what isn’t.

It is a doctor’s job to provide assistance to a patient, and not judgement.

Untestable claims are just that- untestable, non-provable, and not able to be dis-proved, either.

If you’re walking people through delusions involving mundane, directly observable reality- i.e., that someone is after you, or your food is poison- those things can be contested and examined beforehands when reported and remembered, or afterwards. Those that do not, cannot.

@furryhamlet dunno if this answers your ask or not. If not, feel free to send me another, or a PM.

Saying that “phew, now that’s over, and you can go back to living in reality” is still an assumption. It is perpetuating that enforced belief and treating it a “safety.”

Pretending there are no other options.

It IS your place to support those having troubles whether they are secular (mood swings, paranoia) or not (entities.)

[thigmatropes]

Now that I’ve answered OP’s ask, just wanted to also mention:

@aggressively-crying There’s literally zero information in your response in the Notes that wasn’t covered by “If you’re an atheist then good for you.” No one needed a paragraph that is basically boiled down to “I am an atheist and this is what I believe about the world.” That’s not the discussion. The discussion is how you treat people who are searching or questioning, or people with different beliefs than you.

[adopt-a-nuance]

Hmmm what do we think about this, guys hate to gunk up Disability Pride Month with discourse, but this seems pretty important

[kiefbowl]

you literally do not have to think about your identity all that much

[marsupials-of-mars]

[femmefernfodder]

fr tho I hope “undefined” “genderqueer” “gnc” “questioning” or “(agender or whatever else) spectrum” all become waaaay more commonly used

save all that mental energy for important things

“gender is social construct” means GENDER IS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT

[marsupials-of-mars]

I was in the bi/pan/omni mines for years as a teen and now im nonbinary and queer NO MORE DETAIL FOR YOU if you're confused just ask a question

[femmefernfodder]

I came to the gender thing rather late, (being agender spec) and I’m honestly glad it did not reach me in my teens. (at risk of sounding like some kind of conservative that says “don’t confuse the children.” No by all means introduce the children. Just maybe mention, unless it is already causing you distress, it doesn’t actually matter that much. Because social construct.)

[marsupials-of-mars]

Everything about children unfortunately comes down to them just needing good attentive parents. Like, be open to answer questions, if they're stressed ask them why and put things in perspective! Teens are wired to tie things into stress knots! Its notoriously the "find your identity" stage and they dont realize yet that the way you do it is to eventually stop caring. If you're a teen reading this, get ahead of your peers by trying just a little bit less (unless its something that matters to your goals) (you also dont need solid goals yet just focus on feeling ok) (you have way more time than it feels like you do) (i was a teen 4 years ago)

[adopt-a-nuance]

I agree with all of this. Would just like to add, that I think we should actually encourage teens to have goals. Small ones.

Have ambitions. You don’t have to change the world. But be something of a producer, (not a forever-consumer of content) and structure your schedule to spend time alone in your own ideas. Grounding.

Not thinking about career or grand life direction, but how you’d like to be involved in your immediate surroundings.

[marsupials-of-mars]

My aunt introduced me to this quote. Always be doing something! If you try to do everything you will feel BAD and NOTHING will get done. If you do something you want to do that puts something good in the world, you've done more than you would have if you didnt!

[adopt-a-nuance]

I’ve heard some pretty deep criticisms of Mother Theresa, but otherwise appreciate the sentiment

[kiefbowl]

you literally do not have to think about your identity all that much

[marsupials-of-mars]

[femmefernfodder]

fr tho I hope “undefined” “genderqueer” “gnc” “questioning” or “(agender or whatever else) spectrum” all become waaaay more commonly used

save all that mental energy for important things

“gender is social construct” means GENDER IS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT

[marsupials-of-mars]

I was in the bi/pan/omni mines for years as a teen and now im nonbinary and queer NO MORE DETAIL FOR YOU if you're confused just ask a question

[femmefernfodder]

I came to the gender thing rather late, (being agender spec) and I’m honestly glad it did not reach me in my teens. (at risk of sounding like some kind of conservative that says “don’t confuse the children.” No by all means introduce the children. Just maybe mention, unless it is already causing you distress, it doesn’t actually matter that much. Because social construct.)

[marsupials-of-mars]

Everything about children unfortunately comes down to them just needing good attentive parents. Like, be open to answer questions, if they're stressed ask them why and put things in perspective! Teens are wired to tie things into stress knots! Its notoriously the "find your identity" stage and they dont realize yet that the way you do it is to eventually stop caring. If you're a teen reading this, get ahead of your peers by trying just a little bit less (unless its something that matters to your goals) (you also dont need solid goals yet just focus on feeling ok) (you have way more time than it feels like you do) (i was a teen 4 years ago)

[adopt-a-nuance]

I agree with all of this. Would just like to add, that I think we should actually encourage teens to have goals. Small ones.

Have ambitions. You don’t have to change the world. But be something of a producer, (not a forever-consumer of content) and structure your schedule to spend time alone in your own ideas. Grounding.

Not thinking about career or grand life direction, but how you’d like to be involved in your immediate surroundings.

[anglaised]

the desire to pretend white women are simply always victims and groomed into fascist movements instead of being willing participants is by design, u have been taught ur entire life that white women are dainty angels that have to be lead and protected and no harm they do is fault of their own, thats why u think literal nazi women are just confused harmless babies, it’s designed that way on purpose

[adopt-a-nuance]

While I do agree with this post for the most part, if you have any sort of philosophical determinist bent, or even just more garden variety reflection on how people are shaped by systemic forces, it becomes more complicated.

Yes, people should be held morally accountable.

But you’re accidentally invoking a deeper idea here.

Because obviously somebody with different experiences who was dropped into these peoples’ skin would make different choices. However, if these same individuals had been removed from their particular circumstances and social conditioning, they also wouldn’t have made those choices.

They are, in a sense, starting at a disadvantaged point.

Maybe the intent of this post was specifically to point out gender differences, though? That we hold men more accountable than women? Which is an interesting inversion of the usual blaming women for everything, in an effort to generally pad mens’ egos, and in other cases, to reassure them their “over-pursuing” style sexuality is ok and normal.

Anyway.

At the end of the day, it’s actually more useful to discuss techniques to break such people out of such mindsets, not simply write condemnation posts.

Because what got people there is actually immaterial. The point is you have somebody who is clinging to this belief system. They could have almost no agency from being indoctrinated into a cult from 3 years old- homeschooling style or otherwise- or the full calculated agency of deliberately and consciously making that choice, knowing it is bad for others, for personal gain. It doesn’t actually matter. What matters is how to navigate them.

[dougielombax]

DON’T make me press the Nuance Button!

[soshinee]

“whoa” and “woah” is the same but also they are very different… only a select few are capable of understanding this nuanced topic….

[filmphotofranz]

[gunsandfireandshit]

[jewfrogs]

falling asleep during the day: slipping away on a clouds so easy

falling asleep at night: I heard an ant gasp downstairs

[adopt-a-nuance]

might wanna get that checked out /gen

[tomhoppusdelonge]

we live in a world that is mostly free roam and I’m still embarrassed to eat my lunch in public. there is a serious lack of open public places you can go to eat, relax and sit. I’m sick of it

[anxeious]