I think I have an unhealthy

I keep hearing friends and others on tumblr like “WTF” over all the stuff about Bandersnatches in FFXIV and how weird the info and phrases are and I just wanna let you know that Bandersnatch is a creature from Alice in Wonderland and literally everything in FFXIV’s Bandersnatch is a reference to it. And here I thought my unhealthy love for Alice in Wonderland would never come into play one day.

More info under the cut. I know some people probably might read this and think I’m dumb or they might’ve already known all this stuff, but here it is for those who don’t!

Keep reading

I remade my Steven Universe Shipping Meme.

I’m gonna just list my reasons for my OTPs and NOTPs.


Lapis x Peridot - This ship has currently taken over my life. WHY CAN’T THEY HAVE ANY CANON MOMENTS!?

Pearl x Amethyst - Ever since ‘On The Run’ I came to adore this pair. Also I kinda like to think that Amethyst has a secret crush on Pearl.

Ruby x Sapphire - FUCKING PERFECT HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP!!! They’re the definition of true love!


Pearl x Rose - Sorry fans of this. This ship doesn’t appeal to me.

Jasper x Lapis - …Do you see how Jasper treats her? It’s the definition as well as the opposite of Ruby and Sapphire’s relationship: Unhealthy and abusive. I mean if you actually like that’s fine but, I fail to understand how someone would like it, even if they make Jasper more nice which is rather OOC. (Take note, there’s nothing wrong with a little OOC but if a characters’ completely OOC…Yeeaaaaahhh, not entertaining for my taste but that’s a different topic so let’s move on.)

Jasper x Peridot - I used to be okay with it. But it grew out of me. To honest all I can see in this relationship is Peridot being Jasper’s bitch and only used for, uhhh, you know what I mean. To put it short I see it as the exact same type of relationship as Jasper x Lapis. Again, if you like this ship that’s fine, I just don’t and…that’s that I guess.

Meme made by Pastel-Demon on DeviantArt.


So, I had a useless discussion yesterday. It went exactly like all the useless discussions I’ve had before, it’s a tiresome pattern. So, to dump the frustration, here’s a very short summary of every conversation I have with any random group of men about prostitution in the NL. 

Them: Hahahahaha prostitution blabla hahahaha bla bla yay!

Me: I don’t think that’s funny. I am against prostitution and it is a serious matter.

Them: WTF?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?? Why?!?!

Me: Because the purchasing of bodies as objects is unethical and capitalist nonsense. It supports unhealthy, harmful social constructs.

Them: No it’s a great service!!!!!!

Me: Maybe if there were equal human rights, basic income, free education, lots of choice etc, and people would then still choose to do it, fine. But right now that is not the situation we live in.

Them: It is! They can pick a different job anytime!

Me: Then why are you all without a job?

Them: That’s different! You are anti-feminist!!! You deny CHOICE! AGENCY! If you ban it it will still happen but only WORSE because men just NEED THEM! Our penis CANNOT be controlled! Prostitution just needs to be regulated more, duh!

Me: A nordic model would be better. It is regulated in this country and it is still horrible, for example <horrible statistics>.

Them: These are just incidences, exceptions! The women are having a great time here! Escorts make big money. It’s FUN, they like it or they wouldn’t pick the job!!!

Me: <insert even more horrible statistics here>

Them: OBVIOUSLY your stats are fake and all wrong from fake research!

Me: Then where does your knowledge come from, besides the public opinion?

Them: I JUST KNOW THIS, K?!?! Not that I buy though, I would never, really. 


Them: Also, male prostitutes tho. I’d be one!!!!!   (*▼o▼*)ノ

anonymous asked:

If something did happen between Finn and Katie the whole show is ruined for me. It's so out of character and while Finn is not meant to be perfect, he's meant to love Rae. The Finn at the end of series 2 wanted to be with her no matter what and I can't believe they have destroyed a character for the sake of entertainment, it gives girls an unhealthy perception of love; by showing that you must act as your partner wants or risk being cheated on. Do you think there is a chance it was innocent?

Yes, it’s like she can’t trust anyone around Finn, what with Chloe and Katie trying to get her man *blegh* at different points in Rae’s life. That’s so shitty of the writers tbh

I don’t think anything happened though and just my opinion but I don’t consider the scene was meant to be THAT bad in “real life”, just like the time a car ran over Rae. I think what happened was supposed to confuse Rae, to make her explode but I’ll say that in reality there wasn’t any cheating going on.

I think I have an unhealthy obsession with selfies and I’m not even sorry like I’m fabulous and we all are so we should appreciate ourselves more

streussal replied to your post: Things That Happened To Me Today:Acted…

i was going to say “why didn’t you just tell her you were tired after work and needed time to yourself” but then. i have totally created lies this elaborate to avoid interaction and explanation/confrontation

because my dad doesn’t take this as an excuse because i am in a family of extroverts who think being an introvert is ~unhealthy and i need to get out of the house more

like i was willing to go see the fireworks display, but when it became “bring a change of clothes to work, go directly to your brother’s house, then you will walk around downtown portsmouth until fireworks” i was like… i do not want to do this after an eight-hour shift at target, especially when i usually need food and a nap right after in order to be functional

like they just got home and it’s midnight, i do not like being out of the house all day 

(but i am glad you get me, so many elaborate lies) 

i don’t think i have an unhealthy addiction to porn but i probably have an unhealthy addiction to porn hoarding tbh

not that there aren’t unhealthy relationships that women can have with each other but i’m gonna be a bit hyperbolic here and say that I don’t think it’s possible for men to have healthy relationships with women due to the very nature of patriarchy. Any relationship men have with women is predicated on relationships of power and control.

showmethegreyspace asked:

The interesting thing about Pearl is I've known people who have placed all their value as a person in the hands of another person they idolize, so it's kinda interesting to see that example of unhealthy behavior being explored and reconciled in a fictional character. I understand why people don't like Pearl but honestly her reactions are really natural for someone with her personality and internalized insecurities.

yes, I agree. I think this show is very good about showing some stark realistic portrayals in how real people act (just cartoonified and with magic aliens). Being highly anxious and insecure, its easy to lash out and be vicious towards a perceived threat to the “stability” of the way things are (even if that “stability” relies on something unhealthy). It’s not right, but its what people do.

I feel like Pearl’s relationship with Rose was very important for her development and that prior to that she was in an even worse state (her “I’m nothing” mentality had to have come from long before she knew Rose) and it helped her move to a place where she did see worth in herself, just only through another person. Which isn’t healthy behavior, but is sometimes necessary for development, depending on your situation. So it was good for her, by comparison, but not something that could or should be sustained in the long term (I mean, things can always improve and get better but this is an explicitly past relationship so its something that’s moved on from rather than worked on)

and I think that’s a common thing with people. If its not caused by the other person’s behavior, then usually putting all your self-worth into someone else is as a result of other problems, it doesn’t just happen. It’s part of a process and some people need to go through it. I can’t say for sure where the show is going but assuming this is an actual arc, she should eventually move to a place where she finds self-worth in herself without needing Rose as a proxy. And I think that’s a realistic process for a lot of people, so many relationships in our lives are stages of development for us, they lead us to who we will become. They may contain unhealthy behaviors, and they should be acknowledged as such, but I think those relationships still have inherent value for the role they played in a person’s development

that’s my take on it anyway. I think I kind of went off topic though, sorry. My point is I agree, the whole situation is interesting to see in how it relates to real life behaviors and whatnot

Actually I lied. It’s not that I dislike Pearl.

I dislike who she is when it’s about Rose.

Her love for Rose is extremely possessive and unhealthy. She sees Rose as hers and no one else’s and she can be very cruel when it’s about Rose.

She left Steven to climb up a large area where he could have fallen easily. I don’t think Rose would have been cool with that.

She loves Rose but she’s also obsessed with her. And she will hurt other people in order to get that.

I was thinking about in Sworn to the Sword. The hologram that Garnet shows Steven showed Pearl trying to protect Rose.

But…it didn’t really look like Rose needed help. I feel like in trying to protect Rose, she wasted time where she could have been helping other people who probably really needed it.

Rose is POWERFUL. We know she is. Especially if she was originally a ruler of Homeworld.

There are times when I love Pearl. She’s funny, smart, mothering. She’s great!

But. As someone who loves Rose…Pearl loses most of the things that make her good. She has an unhealthy mindset about that love and she can be cruel and petty and selfish.

Which it’s okay to be selfish sometimes. But not to the extent Pearl goes to when it’s about Rose.

My hope is that Pearl moves on from Rose and finally gets a healthier view point about everything.

Maybe she’ll find a new love and maybe she won’t. But I hope she finally heals and moves past these parts of her that are so ugly.

Asexual Themes in Steven Universe

Disclaimer: I don’t necessarily believe this is canon at all, it’s just something that I noticed because I was watching (A)sexual and drawing Steven Universe at the same time // Spoiler Alert: Episode 61: We Need To Talk

Today’s modern culture is very centered around the fact that sex is the “ultimate connection” between humans; it’s considered ridiculous or even unhealthy to think of a romantic relationship without it. This is very much like how Pearl describes fusion;

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

Dakota, I don't mean this in a negative way AT ALL, but I sometimes wonder if part of the reason you seem to have such equilibrium when Swen is attacked is because you are a straight shipper and you don't get triggered (for a lack of a better word) by it and don't have the baggage of RL rejection brought to the mix. What's it like to be treated as badly as LGBT in a way, did the vitriol surprise you? I just wonder what this has been like from your POV, the constant insanity we get. Hugs and Thx!

Hi! :) Sorry I didn’t respond to this last night. I wanted to give it my full attention and I was a bit too tired yesterday. 

I think that, yes, of course! There is a fundamental difference in being a straight Swan Queen shipper and being an LGBT SQ shipper. Granted, I am still unhealthy levels of attached to this ship (lmao)- and I am deeply, emotionally affected by the ups and downs of shipping/fandom. I still sometimes get triggered by bullying in general and my reactions, I think, are genuinely an innate part of my personality. But - more importantly - you are 100% right - when I leave fandom and go back to ‘real life,’ no one is questioning who I love or who I am. No is judging my life or my choices. So, when people invade our SWEN safe space, I think it definitely is different that I don’t experience the same type of hate outside of it. Also, I am privileged in that I’ve seen myself represented on TV and in fairy-tales a thousand times over. I am sure that this does shape my attitude when dealing with fandom stuff in ways that I’m not even fully aware of.

Honestly, I am continuously blown away by the hate for SwanQueen and shippers. When I first started watching OUAT, I watched with a group of co-workers. We would talk about Emma and Regina ALL. THE. TIME. 99% of this group was straight so I pretty much thought that this relationship was something everyone saw and wanted to be a thing? SQ reminded me a lot of ships I’ve had in the past who are ‘against’ each other in the first season but eventually learn they’re stronger together. Considering Once was advertised as a modern fairytale, I sincerely just assumed this was a thing that was going to happen at some point?? I didn’t think it was controversial?? From the beginning I saw the potential in this relationship for the long haul. I was baffled when I came online to find that not everyone was 100% on board?? Or, more so, that those not on board are LITERALLY OBSESSED with making sure everyone knows they’re not? *__*

I also happen to come from a very accepting/socially liberal area. TBH, where I’m from even the most conservative people I know support marriage equality. Homophobia, at least at the extreme level that it exists at in this fandom, was an abstract concept to me, I guess. It was something that I obviously was aware existed… but it was also something I never really saw up close. In that way, every single day that I spend in this fandom is eye-opening. It’s so truly bizarre that a show about love and hope and magic is what has taught me SO MANY ugly lessons about the world? I had so much to learn. This just really wasn’t how I expected to learn it. When I started watching ONCE because I was excited to see Ginnifer Goodwin as Snow White, I didn’t think I would be receiving death threats or corrective rape threats. I certainly didn’t expect to at one point have the police in my apartment telling them that I was scared because someone was threatening me over fictional characters. 

I could probably go on for a long time about this. It’s so confusing and troubling to me that there are people who call us scum and who say that hating us as a fandom is what brings them together. That people are so infuriated by the mere possibility and existence of SwanQueen/Swen that they make up fake accounts?? and plan to make us look back?? Because we exist?? That whenever we are happy about something they have to try to ruin that?? Or that if we try to speak to Adam about being bullied they will jump in and stop their feet and say BUT THEY STARTED IT!!!!!! Wow. Wow. Wow.

But I suppose I’ll just get back to your actual question and say that seeing the hate has changed me so much. In all good ways, I think. Because while it kills me that the world is like this, I would so much rather be aware of it. I was actually thinking about this yesterday because while I always supported marriage equality, I don’t know that five-years-ago me would’ve started CRYING at work over it becoming legal. Which I fully did. 

Hugs back + I hope that’s an OK answer :-) 

When you go out into the real world and you’re trying to accomplish things, men and women are your competitors. But when girls are thinking too much about getting boys to like them or getting a boyfriend, I think that is when this natural competitiveness instinct kicks in and they start to look at other girls as their competition. It’s so unhealthy. I think having grown up, lived through it, having experienced it and having felt that way about other girls at certain points of my life, I now look around and I just love girls. I respect girls and admire girls far more than any of the men around me. You have to stick together and, whether you label yourself as a feminist or not, it’s important that we address equal rights.

a story about autonomy and needs

I write and reblog a lot of posts about autonomy and boundaries in relationships. These posts generally emphasize that everyone has the right to autonomy, that no one is obligated to meet anyone else’s needs, and that it’s never wrong to refuse to meet someone else’s needs.

I write about these things because I think they’re important and true, and because the default script for many relationships – especially familial and romantic relationships – doesn’t teach them.

But I sometimes worry that my posts could promote a different unhealthy attitude: one that discourages people from expressing their needs, or makes them feel ashamed of having needs. I know I’ve fallen into this failure mode before – I think that if I were a good person, I would never want others to change their behavior to accommodate me, and so if I have any desire to change someone else’s behavior, that desire is necessarily evil and should be ignored.

This is also unhealthy and harmful – if I feel too ashamed to express my needs to my friends and partners, then they probably won’t meet them, and then I’ll feel sad and hurt, and that’ll go poorly for everyone involved.

Someone shared a link to this story on Facebook, and I think it describes this situation well.

I’ve also dated really awesome partners who never said “no” to me, either. I could flirt with whoever I wanted! And maybe I’d have to spend two hours reassuring them when I got back, handling their meltdowns because why would I want to chat with anyone else when I had them…

…But they never said “No!”

The lack of “No” is a great way to ensure plausible deniability. Because there’s this stigma in our culture: you should want to support your partner in whatever they do, no matter how much it hurts you. So much of the cultural expectation of love revolves around this fucked-up amalgam of self-sacrifice and compersion, where you should be happy about whatever your partner does.

Except healthy relationships involve saying “No.” You don’t get to thumb the “off” switch on your partner, of course – humans aren’t toys – but it’s entirely legitimate to say, “Crap, this thing you’re doing is hurting me, and it needs to stop.”

The problem with presenting dealbreakers like that, of course, is that the partner may well decide that what needs to stop is your relationship. And that would make you a bad person, because good partners don’t tell their partners to stop doing things that are wounding you. Good partners suck it up, adjust, endure. Even now, I guarantee you that you’ll see some folks complaining in the comments that they’d never place any restrictions on their partners, freedom is beautiful, how dare you be such an asshole by asking them to choose?

Who wants to be that freedom-strangling idiot?

Yet there’s a great way to split that difference: You can get your partner to stop their hurting-you behavior, and never risk them leaving, and if they do they’ll look like the jerk!

You don’t say “No.”

Instead, you quietly dissuade them from doing {$THING} by starting a big ol’ argument every time they do {$THING}.

And after months of realizing that doing {$THING} comes with the hidden cost of having to defend their actions for hours afterwards, they start doing {$THING} less! And it’s not that they’re not allowed to do {$THING}, but rather that you just need them to do {$THING} in this impossibly well-defined way, like tapdancing through a field of land mines, and while theoretically they could do it properly, realistically they’ve been trying to get {$THING} right for months now and have yet do it without triggering a shitstorm of arguments.

If they leave, you get to talk about what a great partner you were. Because you let them do whatever they wanted. They chose {$THING} and kicked you out, and what kind of jerk would do that when they could have both?

Mind you, this is rarely a conscious effort to gaslight; it’s just that internally, you don’t want to be That Person Who Says No, so to preserve your self-image you nod your head and then nitpick every last choice your partner makes.

…Yet after all this time, I’ve learned it’s better to say “No.” My wife’s friends at the time were in fact disrespectful of both me and our relationship – and despite all of my “Sure, go ahead”s, eventually it came to a drama-filled showdown anyway. My poly partners really did not like my flirtatious nature, and eventually it became clear that my relationship styles didn’t mesh with theirs.

It would have been better for them, and me, to say “Okay, I know you want this, but this is a dealbreaker; can you stop this behavior to make me happy, or do we have to split up?” But we’d all been told repeatedly that the only people who did that were controlling jerks, and none of us wanted to be a controlling jerk, so instead we became, well… a controlling jerk with plausible deniability.

What we should have been was an honest person: “Look, I have needs, and these interactions you’re having with these people are really doing damage to me. Can you stop?” And if the partner said “No,” then I would have had to reevaluate whether the benefits of being with them outweighed the pains of watching them do things that hurt my feelings.

That might have ended the relationship.

Yet the wisdom I’ve learned in the years since is that a healthy relationship can withstand a sprinkling of “Nos.” You can’t live on a constant diet of negation, hell, that’s ridiculous, but enforcing the occasional firm [need] with “I know myself well enough to realize I can’t be happy in the proximity of that behavior” is in fact a wonderful thing to be strong enough to do.

Maybe your partner will change, and you’ll come out of it stronger. Maybe your partner will go “Nah” and leave, and you’ll find someone more suited to you. In either case, the outcome is likely far better than stringing someone along, telling them “Yes” when you desire a “No” with all your heart, never quite standing behind the fullness of your convictions but nibbling them with quibbles until they give up out of exhaustion.

Me? I’d rather have someone who stays out of full-throated devotion, instead of being shackled by Pavlovian responses. So I say “No.”

The rest is up to them.


These are the only two times Fitz wears red. When he falls in love with Jemma and when he asks her on a date. 

Have y’all noticed that he wore lots of colors before FZZT? Then after, he only wears blue. Incidentally, the same color Jemma was wearing when she jumped from the Bus. Okay, occasionally he wears black or gray (usually when he’s going to fight with Jemma or something else awful is going to happen) but is this supposed to be him (in canon) subconsciously only wearing “her” color. Or is this just supposed to be some grand coincidence? Or are we just supposed to know that the costume designer became smitten with his eyes? I have so much more I could say on this subject but I feel it’s a tad unhealthy.

Just curious what y’all think though. 

So I was talking to this guy today and he was hitting on me and he asked what I was looking for in a relationship. I just told him I was open to learning about what I like in a partner, but I work a lot and go to school so I don’t have too much free time. I asked him the same thing and he said he hasn’t been in a relationship in 3 years cuz his gf cheated on him so he was “just trying to do him for a while.” I told him I was sorry and cheaters suck, and he said “Well why would anyone cheat on you? You’re a catch.”

And most people would probably take that as a compliment. But all I could think about was my bookshelves of cartoons and the fact that I’ve been binge watching an unhealthy amount of Hunter x Hunter this past month, even forgoing sleep/food to watch it.


No, sir. You do not know the darkest side 

Originally posted by gameraboy

The Pearl “Sworn By the Sword” debate also makes me think of well-intentioned parents who teach us inaccurate or even unhealthy things growing up. That is abuse in some cases–but only when the teachings reinforce or establish a dysfunctional, abusive dynamic between parent and child (even when unintentional, that is abuse), but in many cases, parents may simply teach us things that are wrong or unhealthy that don’t result in or stem from abuse. 

One example I can think of is how parents often teach young people that sex only happens when you “love someone very much.” That does set a lot of young people up for a faulty sex education and distorted ideas about sex, like that if they have sex with someone they must love them or if they love someone they should have sex with them. I wouldn’t consider it abuse per se, more a really unhealthy cultural norm that a lot of parents pass down to their kids.

There are loads of instances where parents mess up and teach their kids unhealthy mentalities they have internalized or that they think are best for their children. In some instances, it can be abusive, but not every wrong or unhealthy thing you teach another person, even someone you have some authority over, constitutes abuse. 

And I think people wrongfully think that when we make this distinction we’re defending teaching people unhealthy things or defending Pearl’s actions, but that’s not true. It’s one thing to acknowledge the wrong someone has done and argue against it (which both the the show itself and most of fandom did), but it’s another thing to hyper-inflate the wrongdoing that person did and misconstrue it as abuse.

anonymous asked:

Idk if you're aware of this but there's a wonderful Typical Olicity movement on twitter where Olicity fans take selfies of themselves under the hashtag #TypicalOlicityFan to basically turn the negative perception of canon freaks exclaiming that there's a certain type of Olicity fan(12 year-old white girls) into something positive. But I ask you, do you think that there is such a thing as a "typical olicity fan"?

I’m skipping ahead in my queue again because I have a dreadful confession to make. I’ve done my best to conceal this deep dark secret ever since I began writing about Arrow, but my inclination toward Olicity over unhealthier relationships on the show has forced me to cast aside my thesaurus, put down my gel pen, and disregard my bedtime to tell the truth: I am but 12 years old. 

Just kidding. I may be melodramatic enough to be a tween, but my gel pens have long since dried up.  And probably wouldn’t be cool anymore anyway. 

A few kind folks on Twitter brought the #TypicalOlicityFan tag to my attention, and I was so impressed that I actually participated. Seriously, it takes one hell of a good cause to get me to willingly post any sort of selfie. There was no agenda or endgame in the project; it was just to make others feel better. Bravo and brava, Oliciters. 

If there is such a thing as a “typical Olicity fan,” I don’t think that it has anything to do with age, race, or body type. Olicity fans have a love of Olicity in common - it doesn’t mean that they’ll agree on every single other thing in the fandom or in life. To lump everybody with an inclination toward Olicity into one big category to dismiss altogether is shallow and lazy. There’s more to Arrow than romance, there’s more to Oliver and Felicity than Olicity, and there’s more to the fandom than shipping. 

Besides, if most Olicity fans out there are 12-year old white girls, then I have completely underestimated the abilities of 12-year olds to fake profile pictures, invent multiple identities, vacillate between genders, and articulate themselves like adults for absolutely no reason whatsoever. Apparently, I could have accomplished so much more with my youth if I hadn’t been watching The X-Files and spending all my money on Bath and Body Works glitter products. Alas.

I…kind of wish more people were straight up and honest about how abuse very much exists in cycles that are actually really commonplace and that none of us are automatically immune to? 

I think it’s really tempting to pretend like abuse is caused by inherently evil individuals who exist in a vacuum independently deciding to be awful, but more often than not it’s learned behaviour. You do not need to be a fundamentally bad person to have been taught bad things. If you grew up in an abusive environment, your entire understanding of human relationships is distorted and unhealthy. Because everything is centred around destruction and exploitation, there aren’t even really ‘relationships’ between people: there are abusers and the abused. In this dynamic, individuals who want to avoid being further abused become abusers themselves. The distinction between abused victim and abusive perpetrator is therefore a messy and uncomfortably porous one; they aren’t mutually exclusive categories at all.  

Any sort of abuse is a resilient and adaptive disease. To avoid being infected you have to make a deliberate decision to unlearn everything you’ve casually internalized your whole life. Having to be responsible for breaking the cycle isn’t a pretty and easy narrative, but pretending like it doesn’t exist does so much harm imo. Everyone needs to remember that you can inflict damage too, even unintentionally. Everyone needs to stay conscious and critical of their behaviour and not lapse into the default of the destructive patterns we were taught. 

alansine asked:

Oh okay cool, thanks! I was just trying to figure Sugilite out. Fusions that consume their parts are like pretty clear metaphors for unhealthy relationships (as fusions are physical manifestations of gems' relationships etc. etc.) And I think it's great that SU promotes having a sense of individuality or not "losing yourself" in a relationship, but I don't really get why Sugilite lost control if Amethyst and Garnet seem to have a pretty healthy relationship? I just don't really get it I guess...

you know, i am not actually entirely sure what was going on there either? maybe a fusion between three gems is just a lot harder to keep stable…? anyone else have any theories about this because this is something that confuses me as well.