The idea of “but everyone knows that” needs to stop.
I saw a post about someone chiding Millennials for not knowing about JKRowlings transphobia, and asking how it is at all possible that people can exist in the world and the internet and, you know, not know.
Which I mean, I get. It is so present in so many of my online spaces that it seems astounding that someone could simply be ignorant! It feels impossible!
But let me tell you a story:
I went on a girls trip with a bunch of friends. All of us are rather incredibly liberal and all of us are incredibly online.
One girl would not stop talking about Harry Potter.
At one point, another girl asked her why she was ok with supporting it, and she had no real clue that JK Rowling was at all transphobic. She had heard that she likes to support Lesbian causes and thought “oh ok cool!” And that was it. She was AGOG with the news and rather horrified.
I must once again emphasize that she was an incredibly online person. She’s a foodie and a restaurant blogger.
Later in the trip we were picking restaurants and I suggested one I found on Google, and she gasped at me. Actually gasped, asking how I could ever be okay picking that one.
The shock must’ve been on my face, because she then told me all of the shitty things that restaurateur does. He abuses staff. Underpays them. Fires them on a whim. Is known for being one of the worst people to his employees in the entire restaurant business on this coast.
And she was so shocked I had never heard of this. Because in her mind, I was just as online as her. And in her online world, EVERYONE knew about this guy.
So I think the moral of this story is: always approach the other person with some empathy. Even online people, even people you think MUST know about how bad people are, may not have heard. It may truly be just them being on a different sphere of the internet than you.
So be gentle, be kind when letting people know they might not have heard about the cancellation of XYZ person. Don’t assume that everyone knows all the same info as you.
By all means, let them know so they can make informed decisions, but being kind will go a lot further than attacking them for some info they might not know yet.
PLEASE give your thoughts on responsible data backing up because i don't know anything about it or computers beyond my google drive (which is full, and i hate google). or reblog your last post about it if it's back there!! I'm so poor and scared for my artwork :')
3-2-1 backup method never fails:
3 TOTAL copies of your file (at least): the original, and two duplicates
2 DIFFERENT storage methods for the file
1 OFFSITE backup
Simplest example:
You have a picture you want to back up. Let’s call it Picture.jpg. You make a copy of this picture and put it on a flash drive and store the flash drive somewhere safe. You also use a cloud service such as google drive or onedrive or icloud etc to make a copy
Now you have 3 total copies of your picture. The original, and two back ups that are in 2 different locations: one on a flash drive and one in a cloud.
The cloud exists OFFSITE. it’s not in your home. so in case there’s some sort of natural disaster or fire or robbery, your picture is safe. You can also fulfill this requirement by putting a flash drive somewhere safe, such as at a trusted friend or family’s home. But you want to make sure at least one backup is offsite. Because think about it, if your room flooded and ruined both your computer/phone and your flash drive, you would lose your picture unless a copy exists somewhere else.
There’s countless different ways to utilize this method and it all depends on what your own personal needs are. You may use CDs instead of flash drives if you’re backing up music. You may go as far as I did and make your own server for offsite file storage. But from beginner to advanced, the 3-2-1 method will keep your files safe.
This is so wholesome! And I love that the release of Project Hail Mary and the timing of the Artemis II launch crossed so we can get content like this. It's a great time to be a space fan!
I'm back with more therapist perspectives of Maruki, might be my last formal post on it but I'm always game to shoot the shit if anyone is curious about something. I love, love, love his character because it is such an authentic exposure to the negatives of the profession and the ethics we have to consider.
Under the cut will be talk of countertransference and ethical practice in therapy. I did another therapist musing post about Maruki here if you'd like to look at that. That one explores a bit more about his background as a therapist based on game implications and what he does "right" or "wrong" in sessions from a basic skill standpoint.
It's pretty damning throughout the entirety of the confidant that Maruki is utilizing his power dynamic to benefit him.
There's something (at times less than) subtlety sinister about a student who is going through trauma becoming their therapists' support beam. Even Morgana recognizes you are not receiving counseling— you are going to him to help with his research.
Throughout the next rank of the confidant Maruki talks about how he saves a cat from a tree despite it clawing the everloving fuck out of him: it's a direct metaphor for how he sees people (and animals, I guess) as things that need saving even if they refuse to accept the help.
It's with those two ideas combined that I really wanted to talk about transference/countertransference in his relationships.
Maruki has two intrinsic facts about him:
He sees people as in need of a savior
He has no boundaries in his own life
Dr. Karen Maroda has a fantastic textbook on this interesting commonality in therapeutic practice. (The Analyst's Vulnerability, if you're in practice settings it's a great read. I wouldn't suggest this to non-therapists, though, it's kind of obscure media that is intended for advanced practice.)
Most therapists go into practice because they have significant empathy, are natural caregivers, and have significant personal trauma. Our motivations for being within our profession must be dissected, analyzed and worked through so that we don't impact our clients with our problems. This is a blind spot in a therapist's work: We have a need to care for others, and if we let that care for others matter more than our client's independence, autonomy and self-made goals… Well… We end up pretty similar to Maruki.
Diverting a bit to the impact of visuals here:
Maruki intentionally looks really similar to Joker. It only makes it more clear how much he projects onto him. Maruki sees Joker as a younger version of himself. Smart, gone through difficult times, deserving of love and support… Because he sees himself so much in Joker and has zero ability to introspect on the subject, he ends up coming off as someone who is not only looking to parent him but also looking to be parented by him. This is the countertransference. His feelings about his client overpower the purpose of the relationship, and he instead removes all boundaries so he can feel like the relationship fulfills his own needs.
Imagine seeing a young child that reminds you of yourself. Most of us immediately get the gut feeling to take care of them, to support their interests and to give them a lot of yourself. However, that kid doesn't ask for that. If you are in a position where that is holding power over them, your sadness over their rejection will prevent them from rejecting you. Joker is a good guy, and he receives some benefit from this relationship. But, honestly, Maruki is just using him to feel good about himself. (I'm also going to point out how ironic it is that he teaches about the halo effect when he is doing something very similar, himself.)
Side note: It's so depressing to me how he views counseling as a profession. He sees it as lacking and something to do because we don't have something "better". Therapy works because human connection works. Regardless of modality, intervention, skills taught… Therapy only works when a true (professional) human relationship is built. This has been the case since the birth of humankind: we have always sought out the care and support of each other. Therapists just have education and research backing up their skill sets. Therapists have existed in informal contexts in all cultures throughout existence, because we need guidance and empathy. Nothing will ever replace that, no medication, no treatment.
Anyway. This is honestly where it gets interesting for me, personally. He also projects his image of Rumi onto Sumire. Rumi and Sumire are also visually similar, intentionally.
However, instead of pushing Sumire and Joker together like he's playing dolls… He does that to Joker and Akechi.
We aren't really told how he found out about what happened in the engine room, or, how much he knows about Akechi. Though, it's likely through his "actualization".
We do know the vow he made to Joker…
That occurred on the same day he gave this description of Rumi, his high school sweetheart...
Which, taken out of context, couldn't you imagine this being pretty similar (very far from exact, he's projecting, after all.) to a description that Joker may give or imagine about Akechi? Just food for thought.
There's a couple of implications here, I think the first is that if Maruki is being authentic in his statement of bringing Akechi back to this reality… Well. Then he sees them as Adam and Steve. Which is honestly fucking nuts. If he actually used his skill to bring Akechi back, it is because he does not want Joker to feel the same, (to him) identical pain that he felt when losing Rumi's love in his life.
The other implication lies in the cookie study he mentions a few times. Is it so wrong to change someone's perceptions in order for them to be happy? Is it so wrong to lie about being the one to bring Akechi back so that Joker is happy? If providing someone a single cookie so they enjoy the cookie more is ethically fine… Then how far can we push until we lie, manipulate and skew reality so that someone sees something as good? Perhaps so far that you lie about how someone's cherished person is, in fact, not dead.
When working with people we tread ethical grey areas. If we don't have a sense of ethics, a therapist can easily push the boundary until the tin of cookies is no different than a life-altering lie to achieve your own goals.
Regardless of either implication: He uses Akechi as leverage. If he can convince Joker to accept his reality by keeping Akechi in Joker's reality— then in his own way he is keeping a love alive that is (in his eyes) like the love he had once had. He would fulfill his own deepest wish through someone he sees as a proxy for himself. Much like a stage mom may push their child to pursue activities and careers that their child may never want, he pushes Joker to make the "right choices" so he can be happy through Joker's happiness, and never his own.
Akechi leaves it off pretty well on the subject.
Ultimately, the messaging here is that Maruki is a fascinating case study of the importance of self study, introspection, and ethical responsibility for therapists (and psychology scientists). He's not alone in his spiral, this is an experience we have to actively challenge in our field in order to not produce harm. I do not joke when I say this— We all feel pain for our clients. That's human. The ability to recognize when we are being self important, biased, and influenced by our own emotions is one of the first hurdles we all have to overcome. It's the major difference between a therapist who is good on a surface level, and one that will truly advance and not do more harm than good.
