minor he/him #JALPHINGIT. #FRATING #IT.
https://rentry.co/spearhead

No title available
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
sheepfilms
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
taylor price

titsay

shark vs the universe
cherry valley forever
art blog(derogatory)
trying on a metaphor
wallacepolsom

No title available

Discoholic šŖ©
I'd rather be in outer space šø
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
Jules of Nature

oozey mess

⣠Chile in a Photography ā£
RMH

Kaledo Art

seen from Germany

seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Canada
seen from India
seen from United States

seen from Ukraine

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from Singapore

seen from Germany

seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from Argentina

seen from Singapore
@killcutbash
minor he/him #JALPHINGIT. #FRATING #IT.
https://rentry.co/spearhead
i wonder how long it would take for someone to notice if i just stopped talking
its jalph month
I need more rogice but not in like a "awww they're friends so cute!!" But more of a Roger is unhealthily obsessed with Maurice and how he manages to blend into society so well
Like hmo Roger is crazy jealous of Maurice, because despite them having similar tendencies, Maurice has something that makes him seem more normal to the rest of the boys, and this drives Roger CRAZY. Like he gets weirdly possessive of Maurice the same way a scientist would be possessive their test subject.
crying fox and clever rabbit
hellloooo, i haven't properly posted here ever, but decided to actually start the acc now.
I usually jump from fandoms from time to time, following my hyper fixations, but I do stay loyal to the main contents I'm interested.
Mainly into lotf and napowars atm (I plan that to be the main focus)
Anyways hello!! and here is a jalph piece i finished recently :)
for a fandom of a book containing disabled characters some of u are extremely abliest š put the fries in the bag mate
jack taking out the competition for Ralph by annihilating piggy and simon Bye
rogice the best chaos duo of all time
ough... jager........ theyre........ I miss....... ouugh.......
Incoming call ššš
Pig ššš·š½
Accept š¢ or decline ā
accept š no HESITATION #P.I.G
when that pig call i Answer š
lines r from death note believe it or not
the choir
I know this is a joke, but it got me thinking!
I have a personality disorder and a psych degree, so those are my qualifications when I say I think theyāre all very normal boys affected by extreme circumstances (probably even Roger; kids donāt develop that kind of mindset without seeing/ going through something truly horrible). Pubescent boys are also categorically pretty wild, and these boys do see the tribalism on some level as a game. Some of the behavior isnāt THEM; itās a character. That of course stops being an excuse somewhere around ritual sacrifice, of course. š
Thereās robust evidence in real life of immensely stressful situations causing people to act in increasingly intense and often combative/cruel ways (think Stanford Prison Experiment). In my opinion, thatās most if not all of whatās going on, althoigh they'll presumably come out with major mental health problems. Leadership and control in particular are shown to foster machiavellianism, callousness, and even sadism under the right circumstances. This seems like what happens to Jack, which is a great combo with his arrogant and bossy nature. In turn, Maurice is a nice, funny guy but ultimately a follower who is easily influenced by the social corrosion. I donāt see anything uniquely pathological there.
Simon is just a quiet, consistently nice boy who is socially ostracized; I could maybe be convinced to see a few borderline traits in his vaguely obsessive/clingy/dependent behavior, but those could also just be signs of anxious attachment or other benign situations. I donāt see anything concerning. Nothing overt. I think that beyond his epilepsy heās good.
Roger however I think is his truest self on the island and was instead conditioned to hide by regular life; obviously heās intensely sadistic, affectively impaired, and erratic, but interestingly heās also a followerāJackās enforcer or headsman, if you will. Antisocial/psychopathic and narcissistic traits track correlationally with sadism, as does boredom-proneness. But someone with NPD struggles immensely with not being in control, in charge, and looked up to; Roger doesnāt lash out at jack, so I donāt think thatās his deal. I think he has psychopathic traits, but you canāt diagnose a PD before age 18, as kidsā personalities are still developing and it could go many different directions.
I donāt think anyone shows HPD traits at all.
OK essay over, LOL. I just love spinning my wheels sbout this stuff.
ok replying because I. have autism and my big special interest of possible 4 or 5 or maybe 6 years even is mental disorders. Of course its true that a lot of how they act is just a result of mob mentality and desperation for control on Jacks part , but if I remember right it is possible for children to exhibit early signs of a personality disorder in a way that it doesn't seem to be just nothing š¤ plus for Jack he was supposed to be some sort of dictator representation and theres a lot of speculation about a handful of dictators having a pd so if Jack was based around those guys I wouldn't put it above him to have a disorder like BPD which is what I sort of believe he has (although I'm more inclined to and confident in saying that he had OCD) you're right about Simon I don't believe he exhibits any cluster b disorders he may have had autism tho š you're also right about Roger I think he definetly exhibits symptoms of ASPD/psychopathic tendencies, and you're right that nobody exhibits any signs of hpd. most of the story is 100% just a telling of how people tend to get under fear that's pretty much the whole point of the book is goldings observations about the innate darkness of humanity shown through stressful situations but its fun for me considering its my special interest to look much deeper into the characters, infer things about their lives, and come to conclusions about their personalities with things like a pd.
I totally agree itās fun to look at things we love through various lenses ā death of the author etc.! I will say that having a special interest around abnormal psychology (the word that is strongly preferred over āmental disorderā in the field) as a 14 year old isnāt really comparable to having tertiary education and work experience in the field AND extensive treatment for borderline personality disorder myself LOL.
I think some of this is a generational mismatch; your generation (Iām 25) is generally eager to apply mental health labels to characters (and yourselves) VERY liberally by my standards. Kids love labels: thatās objective fact, and that attachment to them generally diminishes with age as the ideas of ambiguity and difference become less threatening to our social structures and identities.
Iāll also mention that ādiagnosingā leaders/politicians/famous people is frowned upon professionally because itās a) easy to make sensationalized and stigmatizing claims, and b) impossible to be accurate since we arenāt their clinicians, so Iām disinclined from using armchair psych theories about dictators to map onto Jack.
I think itās much more interesting and less encouraging of stereotypy to examine this from the baseline of what healthy human minds (especially those of children, who are already lacking in many of the emotional and behavioral guardrails and foundations adults have) are driven to in intense and abnormal situations and THEN noting undeniable deviations, like with Roger. I personally think itās way more interesting not to box them in with diagnostic or identity-based labels. For example, instead of āRoger is a psychopath,ā Iām inclined to think, āRoger displays violent tendencies and a disregard for othersāwhy?ā without labeling it.
Jack is obviously an extreme case among the boys, but Iām hesitant to call BPD unless I see very obvious diagnostic criteria being met: I can see some, definitely (the hectic, fear-based, manipulative, jealous, controlling behavior that is associated with the worse side of BPD), but it all seems subclinical. I just nothing that is clearly indicative of a personality disorder and not just environment + childhood + being a bossy, privileged little guy in the first place. Plus, one of the core elements of BPD is identity instability, and 12 is just WAY too young to call that out, especially under the circumstances. OCD I donāt see at all; I just see subclinical perfectionism.
But regardless, it is fun to kick about. I could see them, AFTER the island, developing some awful mental health issues. In a forensic class I took for my neuropsych degree, a professor told us to, in cases of adolescent liability, never forget the neurological impediments faced by developing brains and to be careful not to allow kids to convince you theyāre more mature than they are, just for their own safety. This reminds me of thatānot you, but the boys, who want to play act as leaders, when we see the characters drop and all of them crumple back into children at the end when the officer shows up. Man that is so sad. Makes me want to go reread again. š
i wasn't trying to act like I have more experience than you at all š I am literally 14 years old so obviously not. I understand all your points and I of course think its all perfectly reasonable to say and correct but honestly I don't think I really think of them as having disorders ON the island anyway I always think of lotf as post island. to me some of them may have already been more vulnerable to gaining a pd and the island just worsened symptoms and the afterward was when it wouldve gotten much less "normal seeming" I suppose. not labeling anything is great, I dont label anything much often I just think If you look deeper into the characters themselves you might find something but I guess its all perspective if you really think about it. you cant know anything for sure nothing is definite whatever whatever.
Oh, Iām sorry I came off like that! I am SO bad at tone via text (also autistic): I meant it less like āIām smarter than youā and more like āwow we come from such different backgrounds that makes sense our ideas are differentā š š°
OKAY TRUE I thought you were beefing with me cuz so many adults love to beef with kids in lotf fandom thank you for sharing your take on my post though
great things
the choir
I know this is a joke, but it got me thinking!
I have a personality disorder and a psych degree, so those are my qualifications when I say I think theyāre all very normal boys affected by extreme circumstances (probably even Roger; kids donāt develop that kind of mindset without seeing/ going through something truly horrible). Pubescent boys are also categorically pretty wild, and these boys do see the tribalism on some level as a game. Some of the behavior isnāt THEM; itās a character. That of course stops being an excuse somewhere around ritual sacrifice, of course. š
Thereās robust evidence in real life of immensely stressful situations causing people to act in increasingly intense and often combative/cruel ways (think Stanford Prison Experiment). In my opinion, thatās most if not all of whatās going on, althoigh they'll presumably come out with major mental health problems. Leadership and control in particular are shown to foster machiavellianism, callousness, and even sadism under the right circumstances. This seems like what happens to Jack, which is a great combo with his arrogant and bossy nature. In turn, Maurice is a nice, funny guy but ultimately a follower who is easily influenced by the social corrosion. I donāt see anything uniquely pathological there.
Simon is just a quiet, consistently nice boy who is socially ostracized; I could maybe be convinced to see a few borderline traits in his vaguely obsessive/clingy/dependent behavior, but those could also just be signs of anxious attachment or other benign situations. I donāt see anything concerning. Nothing overt. I think that beyond his epilepsy heās good.
Roger however I think is his truest self on the island and was instead conditioned to hide by regular life; obviously heās intensely sadistic, affectively impaired, and erratic, but interestingly heās also a followerāJackās enforcer or headsman, if you will. Antisocial/psychopathic and narcissistic traits track correlationally with sadism, as does boredom-proneness. But someone with NPD struggles immensely with not being in control, in charge, and looked up to; Roger doesnāt lash out at jack, so I donāt think thatās his deal. I think he has psychopathic traits, but you canāt diagnose a PD before age 18, as kidsā personalities are still developing and it could go many different directions.
I donāt think anyone shows HPD traits at all.
OK essay over, LOL. I just love spinning my wheels sbout this stuff.
ok replying because I. have autism and my big special interest of possible 4 or 5 or maybe 6 years even is mental disorders. Of course its true that a lot of how they act is just a result of mob mentality and desperation for control on Jacks part , but if I remember right it is possible for children to exhibit early signs of a personality disorder in a way that it doesn't seem to be just nothing š¤ plus for Jack he was supposed to be some sort of dictator representation and theres a lot of speculation about a handful of dictators having a pd so if Jack was based around those guys I wouldn't put it above him to have a disorder like BPD which is what I sort of believe he has (although I'm more inclined to and confident in saying that he had OCD) you're right about Simon I don't believe he exhibits any cluster b disorders he may have had autism tho š you're also right about Roger I think he definetly exhibits symptoms of ASPD/psychopathic tendencies, and you're right that nobody exhibits any signs of hpd. most of the story is 100% just a telling of how people tend to get under fear that's pretty much the whole point of the book is goldings observations about the innate darkness of humanity shown through stressful situations but its fun for me considering its my special interest to look much deeper into the characters, infer things about their lives, and come to conclusions about their personalities with things like a pd.
I totally agree itās fun to look at things we love through various lenses ā death of the author etc.! I will say that having a special interest around abnormal psychology (the word that is strongly preferred over āmental disorderā in the field) as a 14 year old isnāt really comparable to having tertiary education and work experience in the field AND extensive treatment for borderline personality disorder myself LOL.
I think some of this is a generational mismatch; your generation (Iām 25) is generally eager to apply mental health labels to characters (and yourselves) VERY liberally by my standards. Kids love labels: thatās objective fact, and that attachment to them generally diminishes with age as the ideas of ambiguity and difference become less threatening to our social structures and identities.
Iāll also mention that ādiagnosingā leaders/politicians/famous people is frowned upon professionally because itās a) easy to make sensationalized and stigmatizing claims, and b) impossible to be accurate since we arenāt their clinicians, so Iām disinclined from using armchair psych theories about dictators to map onto Jack.
I think itās much more interesting and less encouraging of stereotypy to examine this from the baseline of what healthy human minds (especially those of children, who are already lacking in many of the emotional and behavioral guardrails and foundations adults have) are driven to in intense and abnormal situations and THEN noting undeniable deviations, like with Roger. I personally think itās way more interesting not to box them in with diagnostic or identity-based labels. For example, instead of āRoger is a psychopath,ā Iām inclined to think, āRoger displays violent tendencies and a disregard for othersāwhy?ā without labeling it.
Jack is obviously an extreme case among the boys, but Iām hesitant to call BPD unless I see very obvious diagnostic criteria being met: I can see some, definitely (the hectic, fear-based, manipulative, jealous, controlling behavior that is associated with the worse side of BPD), but it all seems subclinical. I just nothing that is clearly indicative of a personality disorder and not just environment + childhood + being a bossy, privileged little guy in the first place. Plus, one of the core elements of BPD is identity instability, and 12 is just WAY too young to call that out, especially under the circumstances. OCD I donāt see at all; I just see subclinical perfectionism.
But regardless, it is fun to kick about. I could see them, AFTER the island, developing some awful mental health issues. In a forensic class I took for my neuropsych degree, a professor told us to, in cases of adolescent liability, never forget the neurological impediments faced by developing brains and to be careful not to allow kids to convince you theyāre more mature than they are, just for their own safety. This reminds me of thatānot you, but the boys, who want to play act as leaders, when we see the characters drop and all of them crumple back into children at the end when the officer shows up. Man that is so sad. Makes me want to go reread again. š
i wasn't trying to act like I have more experience than you at all š I am literally 14 years old so obviously not. I understand all your points and I of course think its all perfectly reasonable to say and correct but honestly I don't think I really think of them as having disorders ON the island anyway I always think of lotf as post island. to me some of them may have already been more vulnerable to gaining a pd and the island just worsened symptoms and the afterward was when it wouldve gotten much less "normal seeming" I suppose. not labeling anything is great, I dont label anything much often I just think If you look deeper into the characters themselves you might find something but I guess its all perspective if you really think about it. you cant know anything for sure nothing is definite whatever whatever.