Home of Voices System, an origin-agnostic, non-disordered plural system. Body age 30+. Minors DNI. We mostly just reblog stuff we like, so expect the contents of this blog to be... eclectic. And frequently filthy. This blog is anti-TERF, anti-SWERF, anti-transmed and anti-sysmed. We are LGBTQIA+ friendly and PRO-endo.
okay but are you going to be understanding if your dom is a little nervous and not as suave as you'd expect their first few times when domming you? are you going to make them feel comfortable enough to slip into the role without making them feel stupid about it? are you going to accept that real sex is not always as rigid as it would seem in text posts or your fantasies and that it is okay if there are some unserious moments in between the intensity? do you understand that we are all just people having fun and we need to be gentle with each other when showing this vulnerability?
reblog this if you are a nervous wreck with shameful fetishes you are too scared to talk about so I can get you drunk or high enough to tell me all about them and then forget
warning: I will slowly weave your fetishes into our conversations, manipulate situations so you end up living your most erotic fantasies, mock and tease you for liking them even if you verbally disagree and push you to develop new, even stranger kinks
“Pratchett went back to older throwaway jokes (like dwarves being apparently unisex) and used them as metaphors to discuss social change, racial assimilation, and other complex issues, while reexamining the species he’d thrown in at the margins of his world simply because they existed at the margins of every other fantasy universe. If goblins and orcs and trolls could think, then why were they always just there to be slaughtered by the heroes? And if the heroes slaughtered sentient beings en masse, how heroic exactly were they? It was a long overdue start on redressing issues long swept under the rug by a parade of Tolkien successors who never thought of anyone green and slimy as anything but a notch on the protagonist’s sword, and much of the urgency in Pratchett’s last few books seemed to be related to them. ‘There’s only one true evil in the world,’ he said through his characters. ‘And that’s treating people like they were things.’ And in the last of his ‘grown-up’ Discworld books, that idea is shouted with the ferocity of those who have only a few words left and want to make them count. Goblins are people. Golems are people. Dwarves are people, and they do not become any less people because they decide to go by the gender they know themselves to be instead of the one society forces on them. Even trains might be people, and you’ll never know one way or the other unless you ask them, because treating someone like they’re a person and not a thing should be your default. And the only people who cling to tradition at the expense of real people are sad, angry dwellers in the darkness who don’t even understand how pathetic they are, clutching and grasping at the things they remember without ever understanding that the world was never that simple to begin with. The future is bright, it is shining, and it belongs to everyone.”
— John Seavey, The Evolution of the Disc (via liquidlightandrunningtrees)
Please save and share this info where possible. This report has since been removed by Amnesty International due to legal threats of libel from JK Rowling. This information is no longer easily accessible.
This is your semi frequent reminder that there is no official AO3 app
All those are unofficial and available on the Google play store as of August 13th 2025. They mirror AO3's content and insert ads, for which the developer gets paid by page impression (that's every time the ad appears in the fic you're reading) not just clicks.
No money goes to AO3, nor to the fic writer. It goes to the person who did the bare minimum.
Many of these apps have poorly worded or non existent privacy policies, so they may also be mining as much data as possible and selling that on to unknown third parties.
Please, just use the official AO3 site and the browser.
As a guy who does Cyber IT as a living PLEASE USE THE MAIN SITE ON THE BROWSER! Do not use unofficial apps. You are opening yourselves up to a multitude of cyber threats, especially when there is no privacy policy or agreements.
The site is mobile optimized, and you can download the fics as PDFs or epubs if you need to read offline like on a plane, there is no reason to use a third party app.
I get in theory why people complain about het ships or whatever, I get wanting to watch queer media I really do, but I guess where y’all lose me is like. I saw some asshole on a post about Sinners complaining it was “hetslop”—this person was specifically doing so while also claiming Remmick was a queer character and thus they were justified in caring more about him than the Black protagonists. which is a whole other disgusting can of worms that has been well addressed by others at this point. but even in the absence of that part of the argument, like, no, i actually don’t think that a hunger for queer stories is an especially good excuse to deride and dismiss a piece of landmark Black filmmaking, especially as a non-Black person. I have a post that’s been going around encouraging folks to engage with more Native stories and characters, and I had someone come onto that post saying in the tags that they’d need these stories to be queer in order to care. and I just think that, you know, sucks! like obviously as a queer Native I also want to see more of those stories too. but idk how else to put it other than to say that Black people and people of color shouldn’t have to be like you in order for you to care about our narratives and experiences. and I think some of y’all are using this disdain for heterosexuality as a cover for your unexamined racial biases. it’s not okay to be racist to people just because those people happen to be straight, and you continue to be white before you are queer.
all those posts that are like "why am i researching currency debasement in the 1860s for a fanfiction no one is going to care" are full of shit, i just DNFd a fic for being obviously incorrect about the history of plumbing
just got a double whammy of the most annoying comments i get on this post back to back in my notes (1. this is going to give authors anxiety!!! 2. but you CAN get tenure by 35!!!), so everyone say bye bye post for another several months
post unlocked because i just dnf'd the project hail mary book due to andy weir's 'rocky thinks in base six' inconsistencies.
if rocky thinks and estimates in base six round numbers and then converts to base ten for ryan gosling's sake (established early!! basically one of the first things ryan gosling works out!), then he would not suggest that they jump from 80 to 86 when rounding up for safety, because neither of those are base six round numbers. he would suggest jumping to a safety allowance of 84 (220 in base six) or 90 (230 in base six).
“some people don’t deserve redemption” redemption isn’t something that’s deserved, it’s something someone does. it’s making the choice to change the way you live your life, to be better, to do good things instead of bad things and try to make up for the bad things. and everyone can and should do that, at any time, no matter what they’ve done. we can’t change the past, but we can choose what kind of person to be now and in the future. we have the responsibility to do so. it is so completely not about “deserving.”
I'm not experienced enough to speak authoritatively of this, but I feel like if you're doing RACK stuff that's potentially harmful either physically or emotionally, both domme and sub alike should have people in their lives besides each other that they can talk to about it instead of just each other. People whom they can both trust to take it with the nuance and understanding it deserves, and to not treat it like an inherent reason to dissolve the relationship or spread information about it around. Like, if something bad happens, it's probably gonna fuck *both of you* up. and you might not have the capacity to be fully emotionally available to support each other through that right away. and having outside people to go to who you can trust to say "oof, i'm sorry that happened, I know you knew the risks but it still definitely sucks when things go sideways. let's get you healing up a bit so you can discuss it with each other safely and figure out how to move forward." seems kinda important. It feels like an important part of addressing those risks.
i think this captures the defining pathology of the collective social media psyche right now. we are in the thrall of people who are wantonly cruel but who also demand to be coddled at all times in every way
the whole "insulting someone based on their appearance is bad because it could indirectly hurt people you like who share that feature" is a good start for unlearning body shaming but i do think we need to go further and remind people that even if there was some physical trait that was magically 10000% exclusive to conservatives and creeps and nobody else ever had it, we still shouldnt be insulting them based on that. because the problem with them is not their appearance its their ideology and actions. by insulting their appearance you arent just indirectly insulting others who look like that, youre literally not making the correct point. stay on topic ya know.
in my post abt tumblr's porn ads I said something like "I don't care much about the fact that I'm seeing porn rather than that we as users can't post it but advertisers can". and a few people have reblogged with tags like "I DO care about seeing porn/I don't want to see it and I shouldn't have to/I also don't care but would love not to flashbang people" all of which are true and fair. but friends, colleagues. I put that line in there to keep swerfs away from the post. it is all too easy for anything which is ostensibly complaining about porn to be dragged into that sphere and lauded as proof that the world is porn addicted and degenerate.
I am a porn creator who considers porn & sex a significant part of my artistic expression. when I say I'm not bothered by seeing porn on dash, I mean ideally I would be seeing much more of it from real people. but even if this wasn't the case, I consider the naked body a neutral object to look at - it doesn't disturb me and I am concerned at the amount of people who seem disturbed at seeing any amount of nudity on their screen.
so let me be more explicit. the problem with the porn ads is not the porn, it's the ads. it's the fact that advertisers can post things that users can't. it's the inability to filter out the content because it is an ad and is not beholden to the same TOS or labelling rules as users are. it's the fact that many of the ads are for AI services, showing AI generated skinny white women (further pushing the needle on the extreme fascistic, white supremacist body image issues people are developing) in lieu of paying real life sex workers.
it's cool and fine that you would prefer not to see explicit porn in your day-to-day life. but you need to know that repeatedly, compulsively reinforcing this desire when I'm trying to talk about a problem of capitalism and censorship of expression does in fact position you nearer to the censors than it does to me and other sex workers.
i can't see my mutual's boobs on tumblr. i also can't see a sex worker's boobs on tumblr. but if Age Of Elf War Gambling Scam wants to show me digital elf titty, i will see those titties seventy times in a row, and if i complain i will be told to buy a paid subscription to tumblr.
porn isn't the problem, consent is. advertisers telling us we can't show our tits OR avoid seeing theirs is an incredibly stupid situation to be in.
"Six weeks into the term, I assigned my rhetoric and writing students a 20-page article. It was the same length I had assigned for five years and the same length I had read without complaint as an undergraduate a decade ago. Not one student finished it.
When I asked why, a student answered honestly: It was too long, and she kept losing track of what the paper was about. This was not a remedial class: These were students who had cleared the admissions process and written essays good enough to get them here. Yet a routine academic reading assignment had defeated them.
Every generation of professors has complained that their students cannot read. The lament is usually overblown, but data have caught up to anecdote, and what I am seeing in my classroom is no longer a hunch. There is a measurable, generational collapse in sustained reading and writing, and the academy is responding to it with improvisation and exhaustion rather than the structural overhaul it requires.
In February 2024, Adam Kotsko, who teaches in the Shimer Great Books School at North Central College, wrote in Slate that students who once handled 30 pages of reading per class meeting now seem “intimidated by anything over 10 pages and seem to walk away from readings of as little as 20 pages with no real understanding.” Crucially, he added that this is “not a matter of laziness on the part of the students” but of underlying skills they were never given a chance to build.
The Chronicle of Higher Education’s 2024 investigation found the same pattern across institutions as different as the Stevens Institute of Technology and Wellesley College, where the average SAT exceeds 1400. Nicholaus Gutierrez, an assistant professor at Wellesley, told The Chronicle that the baseline for what students consider a reasonable amount of work has dropped so noticeably that he has cut his readings accordingly; a 750-word essay now strikes many students as long. At Stevens, the science and technology studies associate professor Theresa MacPhail described following the mantra of “meet your students where they are” for so long that she has begun to feel “like a cruise director organizing games of shuffleboard.”
Worse, the national data tell the same story in colder language. On the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) writing assessment, which is the most recent comprehensive writing benchmark, only 24 percent of 12th graders reached the Proficient level, and just 3 percent reached Advanced; another 21 percent scored below Basic. The reading side of the ledger is worse, and getting worse fast: The 2024 NAEP results released in September 2025 show 12th-grade reading scores at the lowest level recorded since the assessment began in 1992. Thirty-two percent of 12th graders now score below NAEP Basic in reading, meaning that, in the assessment’s own language, they likely “cannot draw general conclusions based on concepts presented explicitly in a text.” And yet more than half of these same seniors reported being accepted to a four-year college. That last sentence is the whole problem in one line: We are admitting a cohort that cannot read at a college level and are pretending otherwise.
Why is this happening? One reason, of course, is smartphones.
I came into teaching as a skeptic of the anti-smartphone argument: I had a phone in my pocket throughout high school and college in the 2010s, and I read long books anyway. I now think I was wrong, because the neuroscience has caught up. In a 2017 paper, Adrian F. Ward and colleagues at the University of Texas at Austin’s McCombs School of Business showed that the mere presence of a participant’s smartphone — whether that be face down, powered off, untouched, or across the desk out of vision — measurably reduces available working memory and fluid intelligence on cognitive tests, with the largest effects on the most phone-dependent users. A 2022 study by Motoyasu Honma and colleagues at Japan’s Showa University used near-infrared spectroscopy to compare reading on a smartphone with reading the same passage on paper, and found that smartphone reading produced overactivity in the prefrontal cortex, suppressed sigh generation, and led to general lower comprehension scores; the authors argued that the sigh inhibition and prefrontal overload were causally linked to the comprehension decline.
So when a student tells me they “kept losing track” of a 20-page article, I have to acknowledge that they may be describing a measurable neurological condition. The neural pathways that support sustained attention are built by use, and they atrophy without it. Your body is a use-it-or-lose-it system, and the brain is no exception.
Another reason for the decline in student reading capability is increasing reliance on generative AI. In June 2025, Nataliya Kosmyna and colleagues at the MIT Media Lab released a preprint titled “Your Brain on ChatGPT.” They divided 54 participants into three groups writing SAT-style essays — one using ChatGPT, the second group using a search engine, the last group using nothing — and monitored brain activity with a 32-channel EEG. The ChatGPT group showed the lowest neural connectivity of the three, with up to 55 percent reduced connectivity compared with the brain-only group, and “consistently underperformed at neural, linguistic, and behavioral levels.” Eighty-three percent of LLM users could not quote a single line from essays they had written minutes earlier. When the LLM group was forced to write without AI in a follow-up session, their brain activity did not bounce back to baseline; the researchers coined the term “cognitive debt” for the lingering deficit.
This is the first neurophysiological evidence that early reliance on LLMs measurably alters the brain’s engagement with writing tasks, and it is consistent with what those of us in front of classrooms are watching happen in real time. When I assign analysis, I am not trying to extract a polished product; I am trying to put the student’s mind through resistance in order to make it stronger. Offloading the struggle to a chatbot does not “free students up for higher-order work.” It deprives them of building the strength to do any substantial cognitive work at all.
There is a final factor that is contributing to this decline in reading skills, and that is that the students arriving in my classroom today are the first cohort to have experienced Common Core-influenced reading instruction across the entirety of their K–12 schooling. Whatever the standards’ original intent, the on-the-ground implementation in many districts replaced sustained reading with the practice of pulling “evidence” from disconnected short passages, the same format used on the standardized tests that increasingly determine school funding. The education scholar Natalie Wexler, among others, has documented this pivot in detail: Students drilled on “finding the main idea” in two-paragraph excerpts never build the stamina or background knowledge that longform reading requires. The pandemic then added fuel to a fire that was already burning. NAEP scores for 13-year-olds dropped sharply in 2022 and have not recovered. A 2023 EdWeek survey found that 24 percent of secondary-school administrators described pandemic learning loss in English and language arts as “severe or very severe.”
In July 2025, the journalist Mary Harrington argued in The New York Times that “thinking is becoming a luxury good.” The ability to read deeply and reason at length is fragmenting along class lines as ultra-processed digital media replaces text in everyday life, much as ultra-processed food has replaced cooking. Her longer treatment of the subject in First Things makes the more provocative case that we are witnessing the end of print culture itself, and with it the end of the cognitive substrate on which modern liberal democracy was built.
I see this stratification in the classroom and on the page every week. My students from districts that protected sustained reading through small class sizes, strict phone policies, and faculty who refused to teach to the test all arrive with their attention relatively intact. My students from districts that surrendered to devices and standardized testing arrive cognitively winded. A democracy that requires a literate electorate is now training one fraction of that electorate out of literacy while marketing to the other a “deep work” lifestyle as a luxury good. The students who cannot read a 20-page article today are the voters who will not be able to read a bill, or the jurors who cannot follow a closing argument, tomorrow.
I do what I can in my own classroom to address the problems. I break 20-page articles into two halves and assign the first half with explicit analytical tasks. I require exploratory writing before formal drafts. I model (visibly, on the board) how to track an argument across pages or distinguish a source’s claim from my own analysis. I make structured peer review explicit, because the workshop format I used to take for granted now collapses into “this is good” and “maybe add more details” the moment I step back.
But I want to be plain about the limits of what an individual instructor can do, and all of these solutions have costs. Scaffolding a 20-page article into halves compromises the integrity of the argument I am asking students to engage, just as modeling note-taking in a credit-bearing rhetoric course is using a college slot to teach a middle-school skill. None of the syllabi I teach are designed to deliver this type of cognitive rehabilitation, and pretending otherwise has produced credential inflation. We cannot keep conferring degrees on students who cannot do what the degree is supposed to certify.
I’m afraid I don’t have answers. I do, however, have some questions that may point us in the right direction. If higher education is going to respond to the reading crisis as a structural problem rather than a private burden carried by composition instructors and adjuncts, it has to stop avoiding the following questions: If a majority of incoming students cannot read at a level the curriculum requires, are we admitting students we cannot serve, or offering a curriculum we cannot provide?
Why are first-year writing and reading-intensive general-education courses still the most adjunctified, lowest-paid, highest-load corner of the university, at the precise moment when their work has become the most important work the institution does? What is the responsible institutional response for AI usage: Is it a syllabus statement, or a sequencing principle that requires students to demonstrate the cognitive work themselves before AI assistance is permitted?
Why are most college classrooms still phone-permissive by default? K–12 districts from Florida to California are now banning phones bell to bell; higher education has somehow lagged behind the public schools. Universities benefit from a pipeline they did not build and refuse to repair. What would it mean for a university system to invest seriously in the reading instruction happening in the high schools that feed it, rather than treating remediation as something to be quietly outsourced to first-year composition instructors?
The thing I am no longer willing to do is pretend this is a temporary adjustment period, or that “students will adapt.” They will not adapt on their own. The conditions that produced this collapse are still in place: the phones, the algorithmic feeds, the test-prep excerpts, staffing models that load the reading-intensive work onto the most precarious faculty, and now the chatbots that finish students’ sentences before they’ve even begun to think of them. If we want literate citizens, we will have to rebuild the conditions for literacy deliberately, against the grain of every incentive currently pointed the other way. I know the academy has the will to do that. It also has the obligation."
— Tyler Jagt, 1 June 2026, "My Students Can’t Read"
The generational collapse in literacy is measurable, persistent, and likely to get worse.
as a person under the agender/nonbinary umbrella I actually think the recently increased focus on a nonbinary person’s agab is insanely fucking uncomfortable and blatantly exorsexist. Stop trying to sort NB people into boxes of amab vs afab, transfem vs transmasc, tma vs tme, etc etc. It is not praxis or activism to keep attempting to binarize people whose entire identities are built around the fact that they DO NOT ADHERE to a binary. You are just being a fucking tar pit #sorry
tma and tme are to describe one's relationship to transmisogyny. it's similar to describing a relationship to anti-blackness by "creating a binary" of black and non-black (which includes white people, latino people, asian people, etc). tme includes anyone who is not transfeminized (such as cis men, cis women, trans men, etc). just because there are two categories of something doesn't mean you're getting forced into a gender binary. ignoring your relationship to transmisogyny by refusing to understand what tme/tma means is exactly the same as ignoring your relationship to anti-blackness by saying "i dont see color", because sure, you can ignore that there's a structural & systemic issue regarding a specific demographic, but it doesn't mean its not there!
nigga did your white ass really just come onto a black person’s post to try and lecture them about not knowing their own relationship to antiblackness
number one check yourself. Number two comparing TMA/TME to anti-Blackness is a false dichotomy and I need white queer people to stop trying to compare themselves to Black people every single chance they get. oh my god
The two are NOT similar. If you really wanna play the game of equating race and gender, then the equivalent to “Black and nonblack” would be transfem/trans woman and non-transfem/trans woman, not TMA/TME. I can assure you that NO black person is going around saying “antiblack racism affected vs antiblack racism exempt.” Because That Is Stupid.
EVERYONE is affected by antiblackness, because of how deeply it’s ingrained into our entire societal structure. You cannot write off specific demographics as not being affected by certain forms of oppression or discrimination, because the nature of living in a white supremacist-capitalist-patriarchy is that ALL of these systems are INTRINSICALLY connected with each other, and affect EVERYONE to some degree. There are countless historical examples of antiblack legislation directly impacting poor communities of other racial groups- including white people. There are primary targets of discrimination, obviously, but nobody is truly “exempt” from any sort of oppressive system unless they are at the VERY top of the damn food chain.
In the same vein, the intersection of transphobia and misogyny is ALSO deeply ingrained into our society. And because of that, nobody is truly “transmisogyny-exempt.” Even people who aren’t the primary targets are still directly impacted and negatively affected by transmisogynistic systems. I find TMA/TME to be useless in terms of categorization because it directly posits that everyone who gets sorted into the latter group just doesn’t experience any oppression or discrimination derived from transmisogynistic bases at all, which is ridiculous, because that happens All the time.
A trans man or enby who’s mistaken for a trans woman and is assaulted for it, a cis man who’s belittled and attacked on the basis of being Too Feminine, a cis woman who’s publicly shamed, derided, and transvestigated for having testosterone levels that are “too high,” are all examples of non-transfem/trans woman groups being negatively affected on the basis of transmisogyny.
Poor white people being affected by legislation meant to target and attack Black populations and the massive trend of colorism throughout Asian communities are examples of nonblack groups being negatively affected on the basis of antiblackness.
You cannot sort people by what oppression they do and do not face, and attempts to do so are inherently exclusionary and are bound to lead back into denying people of their lived experiences, just because they don’t line up perfectly into these specific categories of “this genre of person goes through this” vs “this genre of person doesn’t go through that.”
I believe that TMA/TME was coined with the best intentions, but the problem is that it’s a clumsy dichotomy and the way a lot of people tend to use it ends up leading back into the same issues of being binary (“amab trans people experience this, afab trans people don’t experience that”) and then THAT leads back into a whole heaping mess in and of itself
Talking about the way transfeminized people are targeted by transmisogyny is not a bad thing in and of itself! But like, you can just say transfem/non-transfem- or even just “transfeminized” to describe the position oppressors will often place people into in order to enact transmisogynistic violence against them- instead of directly trying to state what different groups of people Do And Don’t Experience. you can say “primary targets of transmisogyny” without directly implying that certain groups are exempt from it all together.
THAT is my issue at hand when it comes to TMA/TME. It is an awkward framework to describe oppression, because oppression doesn’t work like that in reality
It's really funny when doctors and medical professionals don't like, meaningfully understand how comorbidity works. "oh, it's very unlikely someone would have all these rare conditions at once"
yeah. maybe that would be fair to say about say, discrete viruses. but about syndromes?
like. the conditions of the human body don't know that they're taxonomically discrete. they don't know that they have different names or lists of symptoms. if a human body has a consistent issue with say, its heart rhythm, or its inflammatory response, or its glandular response, or immune system
the reason that ehlers-danlos syndrome (EDS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), postural tachycardia syndrome (PoTS), IBS (irritable bowel), autism, and even shit like coeliac and PMDD or endometriosis overlap is bc like. these are largely inflammatory issues or issues with the fascia
It's not "what the fuck, how can this person have all these different things wrong with them", bc these are largely like. syndromic definitions of how x bodily issue manifests in different systems, structures, or organs of the body
many of these conditions change in definition over time
and that's bc they're studied and understood more over time where people more meaningfully understand underlying causes and issues, such as through hormone or genetic profiles, or largely like. immune response
it's also how "rare" conditions become understood as more common over time
idk like. not to be on my soap box on this specific issue but this is what happens when you don't teach medical professionals philosophy beyond the basic ethical shit. the reason philosophy is important to medical study is so you don't mistake etymological or philological issues for scientific ones
I got told by a -medical geneticist- that it was extremely unlikely for someone to have both celiac and EDS because both were so uncommon so therefore I probably didn't have both, despite clear physical evidence to the contrary. I pointed out that there's enough people out there that even with low incidence of both, even assuming there was no link, statistically there were going to be people with both just by basic probability and that 'rare' didn't mean 'doesn't happen. I also pointed out I had 2 younger half-sibs with celiac and a cousin with celiac, T1D, and EDS-h, so odds are that no it wasn't as unlikely as she thought especially given that kind of family history.....She did not in fact care for my attitude. I didn't care for her lack of understanding of her own job, so the feeling was mutual.
I think many medical professionals are very narrow-focused on their specialty, forget the rest of the body exists, and don't think of it all as an entire system.
I recall reading the book A Slow Death: 83 Days of Radiation Sickness. It's about a nuclear worker who received a lethal dose of radiation due to a prompt-critical accident while making nuclear fuel. As the title implies, he died over the course of 83 days.
What struck me about the book was, it's pretty clear his DNA was just shredded and nothing was really replacing itself effectively. His organs and systems failed at a rate consistent with their typical cellular lives. At each step of this, they brought in specialists to manage the problem: he wasn't producing erethrocytes, they brought in hematologists. His stomach lining was breaking down, they brought in gastroenterologists, &c. Each one had this faith that if they kept him going past this crisis, his body's natural healing would take over and he would get better. But looking at his body as a whole, it was obvious from very early that was Just Not Happening. Each specialist was looking at it as "Oh no, my one part is failing, I need to get him through this and the rest of his otherwise healthy body can pull him along!" except the whole damned body was going because that's what a lethal neutron flux does. And somewhere around day 30 or so they should have said "I'm sorry, this is not going to work, we are switching to palliative care" and he could have died a week or two later, but that's not how specialists think.
The body doesn't know we've divided it up into organs and systems and specific types of cells. It's just a body and each part affects everything else.
the number of doctors and other medical professionals, including knee specialists and physical therapists, who were completely unable over the course of several years to give me any advice about a problem with one of my knees once it was determined that 'tingling and numbness' meant it was 'something with a nerve, probably getting pinched or something' was staggering.
finally i asked my neurologist, whom i had because i'd eventually gotten some weird symptoms in my neck identified as part of a pattern of chronic migraines.
she agreed it was a compressed nerve, possibly not in the knee itself but in the hip or where it runs parallel to the iliotibial band down the outside of the thigh.
regardless her recommendation was. a specific stretching exercise.
which didn't 100% erase the problem, but ameliorated it enough that it's no longer one of my major mobility concerns or sources of pain.
absolutely insane this was not on the radar for anyone who was supposed to be an expert in knees or stretching, simply because it involved Something To Do With Nerves.
Eczema, allergies, and asthma are all likely to overlap, because they're all different ways of the body overreacting to harmless substances.
Autism, ADHD, learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities, and Tourette's are all neurodevelopmental conditions, and guess what? When the brain decides to develop abnormally, it doesn't look at a checklist for a specific condition and then follow the list! It just develops weird, and people label the results. Sometimes with a LOT of labels.
Generic names that cover all the possible manifestations of an issue often aren't very helpful. Because not everyone whose skin keeps trying to self-destruct ALSO stops breathing if they try to jog. Even if the "manufacturing error: air causes breathing shutdown" and the "manufacturing error: skin breaks down when in contact with necessary skin yeasts" are coming from the same source, the solutions may vary.
So breaking things up into discrete labels is helpful. But it sure would be nice if medical practitioners were TAUGHT that this was what's going on!
jkr is literally posting upskirt photos to her social media. when will it finally get through to harry potter fans that their support makes her feel confident and correct enough to do things like this
If the holocaust denialism SOMEHOW wasn't enough for you to shut up about your favourite kids book as an adult; JK Rowling just committed a sex crime IRL against a transgender woman.
When do we start to care.
One Body, Many Voices @voices-sys - Tumblr Blog | Tumgag
