counter identity

I saw a post about the overall silence, the muted visible response, to this newest Marvel development and I decided to write this. I don’t want to contribute to the silence. I want to make this post to say definitively: There is something deeply, deeply wrong at the core of Marvel.

In case you’ve somehow missed the recent news, here’s a brief summary: In released variant covers of the serial “Secret Empire,” Magneto, Erik Lehnsherr, a canonical Jewish survivor of the Holocaust, has been portrayed as a Hydra villain. And guess who is the author of this? Yes, it’s Nick Spencer again.

I want to address two things here:
1. The implications of Magneto being cast as a Hydra villain, a supporter of Hydra, and an enabler of Hydra. This is a man who lived through WWII, who was tortured in a concentration camp, who was tattooed with a number on his arm, whose family was murdered by Nazis, whose entire motivation is stopping such a slaughter from ever happening again no matter the cost. And now, he has been painted with the Hydra brush, Hydra which was within the Nazis during WWII, Hydra which is inherently Nazism at its core and then goes beyond the “public” face of Nazism to worse levels. That Hydra. This is an ultimate spit in the face of the character, of his creator, and of his fans. To take a character that has the history Magneto does, to take a character that incorporates the historical reality for so many people, to take a character that has a cultural identity purposefully counter to Nazism and to turn that character into a member of Hydra is the ultimate black mark on Marvel’s resume. Magneto’s story in the context of the Holocaust has been changed from victim to enabler, from survivor to villain - erasing everything that made him the character he is from his very foundation, erasing his cultural identity, context, and history; all so Nick Spencer can “shock” his audience.

Now apparently there are those who say Hydra is no longer about Nazism, that Hydra is something different. To those people I say: you are practicing the first stages of historical revisionism. You are purposefully ignoring the history of the fictional organization to suit your own interests. But, sure, let’s look at Hydra that way instead. If Hydra was not Nazism but instead was just a supporter of Nazism, a enabler of Nazism, Magneto has now been put in the place of a supporter and enabler of the very thing that destroyed his life and the life of his family and his people. This kind of revisionism implies there is a spectrum of Nazism - that the men who patrolled the camp gates were less Nazi than those who ran the gas chambers, that the men who collected the shoes were less Nazi than those who beat prisoners to death with rubber. This kind of revisionism is not acceptable and not logical - this is the kind of revisionism that says “Millions died in the Holocaust and only some of them were Jewish.” *You know* that’s not acceptable, don’t pretend it is.

2. The rewriting of Captain America as a secret Hydra agent. Yes, I know - I’m not going to turn this into a post about Steve Rogers, I want to make a point here. The thing about Nick Spencer’s first foray into plastering Nazism onto a character is that Marvel allowed it to happen. The original character of Steve Rogers, Captain America, was created by Jack Kirby, a Jewish American who fought in WWII. Again, the revision of Captain America being a Hydra agent all along was an intentional move by Spencer to express anti-Semitism by taking the creation of a Jewish man and turning the character into a Nazi symbol (see above for the argument of Hydra vs Nazism). The key thing to note here is that there was major backlash to this choice. We all saw the hashtags and the articles, plenty of us chose not to purchase the issue and give support to Nick Spencer’s writing. I now realize that storyline was intentionally created by Nick Spencer as a trial balloon. Nick Spencer rewrote Steve Roger’s history to be that of a Hydra agent for one reason - to see what Marvel and fans would do.

What did Marvel do? Nothing. Marvel did not censure Nick Spencer at the time and so his trial balloon passed and he was validated.
Nick Spencer was allowed to write this character arc. Marvel readership purchased and read it.
And this points to the deep, deep problem at Marvel.

Firstly, there is a problem with the readership. Even with the boycotts of the Captain America arc - and here’s where I explain why I included the character in this post - Marvel made enough sales that they didn’t see a problem with approving the Hydra-Magneto storyline.

And this leads to my second point: Marvel’s core editing team is broken somehow. There’re two things that could have happened here: 1) The editors that approved Nick Spencer not just once, but twice, did not see fit to throw the decision further up the chain to a point where someone would say “Marvel is not going to support this”; or, 2) The editors *did* throw the decision further up the chain and a high-up executive at Marvel said “Yes, we’re going to approve and publish this storyline” (not only once, but twice).
I don’t know which of these is what happened. I want to suspect 2, mainly because it’s known the Marvel CEO is a supporter of Trump rhetoric, but I’m not going to make any accusations.

My main concern here is the readership of Marvel comics. Publishers don’t publish unless they have an audience willing to buy. The trial balloon of Hydra!Cap proved to Marvel there is an audience for Nazi/Hydra revision storylines for established Marvel characters (specifically ones with Jewish origins, be it author- or character-based) - this means with the boycott, their sales were still in the black for the storyline. Who are these people eagerly reading and supporting these storylines? I don’t know, but remember when considering this topic that there are fans out there who support Nick Spencer’s anti-Semitic views. There are fans out there who probably have those same views.

That’s what you’re supporting when you support Marvel, now and in the future.

anonymous asked:

Are people with DID neurotypical or neurodivergent? I have seen mixed information about this.

Hi,

This is probably going to be one of our more controversial positions, but I feel very strongly about this issue and don’t want to censor myself because of Tumblr’s current popular narratives. I apologize in advance for the length of this post; I’ve tried to add bolding to help highlight important points or arguments. (*s have been added arounded bolded sections for screen readers.)

As an individual with autism, I actually really, really dislike that individuals without neurodevelopmental disorders have co-opted the concept of neuroatypical / neurodiverse. *The concept of neurodiversity originated with the autism community in the 90s.* The term “neurodiverse” was coined by Judy Singer, and the term “neurotypical” was coined by Jim Sinclair. Both are on the autism spectrum and first used the terms in an autism specific context. The terms have since widen to include other neurodevelopmental (and sometimes other neurological) disabilities, conditions that are often considered “cousins” to autism. For example, they soon came to be inclusive for ADHD, Tourette Syndrome, dyspraxia, and similar conditions. 

*“Neurodiversity” argues that neurodevelopmental disorders are normal variations of neurotype and don’t needed to be medicalized or treated.* Even if someone has negative symptoms associated with their neurotype (ie, anger issues, executive functioning issues, etc), those can be treated or helped without trying to force the individual to completely overcome or hide their differences. It’s against “treatments” such as ABA, punishing individuals for their tics, or institutionalization. 

The obvious, immediate problem with trying to include mental illnesses under “neurodiversity” is that most people accept that mental illnesses are problems that do need to be treated. For example, someone with depression shouldn’t just ignore their disorder; it can literally endanger their life. Mental illnesses necessarily indicate a level of distress or dysfunction. If an individual’s traits, behaviors, or experiences aren’t causing them or others clinically significant distress or dysfunction, they don’t have a disorder. Even with DID/OSDD-1, someone can choose to remain multiple, but they need to seek treatment for symptoms of dissociation (especially amnesia) and for posttraumatic symptoms. 

*The term “neurodivergent,” meant to cover anyone with any mental health symptoms, neurological condition, or neurodevelopmental disorder, completely ignores the anti-cure stance of the neurodiversity movement.* Very, very few people are against the idea of mental illnesses being cured. Even the original Mad Pride movement wasn’t against mental illness being cured; their fight was against both harmful treatments and against a lack of treatment for those who needed it. Similarly, Mind Freedom International wants full recovery to be an option for people diagnosed with a mental disorders, it just doesn’t believe that current approaches to psychiatry can provide this recovery. This doesn’t align with the idea that individuals who are neurodiverse don’t need a cure and that their “disorder” is a valid variation of human neurology.

Another problem is that *mental illnesses aren’t lifelong variations in neurotype.* Someone can have a depressive episode and then return to their previous level of mental health. Someone with an anxiety disorder can go on medication or go through therapy to alleviate or cure their anxiety. Eating disorders can go into remission. Personality disorders are difficult to cure, but they can be cured. As well, many disorders have a clear and reversible environmental cause, such as trauma; DID/OSDD-1 are both caused by chronic childhood trauma, and healing from that trauma often naturally leads to integration. The only possible exceptions to this are some cases of OCD (particularly childhood onset OCD or OCD resulting from organic causes), schizophrenia spectrum disorders, and bipolar disorders, all of which are strongly genetically linked, often become evident at a young age, and are generally present for life.

Developmental disorders are the result of abnormal development of the nervous system, particularly the brain. They’re inevitable in that they don’t rely on any triggers to be expressed but are present from birth (barring presentations associated with damage to the nervous system), even if symptoms aren’t immediately noticeable or diagnosable. Theoretically, specific developmental disorders (that affect only one area of development) can potentially be overcome by early intervention, but some don’t even recognize these as developmental disorders but instead label them developmental delays. In any case, pervasive developmental disorders (that affect several areas of development) are chronic and likely life long.

This means that someone born with a developmental disorder is going to have a developmental disorder no matter what they do or don’t experience, and if it’s pervasive (and possibly even if it’s not), nothing is going to make it go away. Someone who’s developmentally disabled might learn to minimize or hide the disability’s effects, but trying to overcome it in the short term can lead to major backlash and a temporary or even permanent loss of skills in the long term. Unlike mental illnesses, there is no cure for a condition like autism or Tourette Syndrome. Again, this was why the concept of neurodiversity was created, to fight the narrative that there should be a cure.

Finally *neurodevelopmental disorders can be an important part of someone’s identity.* For example, there is are autism communities, and autistic people sometimes refer to ourselves as “autistics.” There are camps for people with Tourette Syndrome to hang out, get to know each other, be accepted as who they are, and be helped to accept themselves as they are. Many people with ADHD argue that the biggest challenges of ADHD come from a lack of acceptance and that ADHD’s unique way of processing information can be an advantage. Again, these are all in line with the idea that neurotype is a variable just like any other. I’m ethnically Jewish, I’m autistic, I have brown hair and brown eyes, and all of those are valid variations of traits.

In contrast, *it’s unhealthy for someone with a mental illness to make their illness a significant part of their identity.* It’s offensive to call someone a “depressive” or an “eating disordered person.” Communities of mentally ill people often have to be careful not to encourage unhealthy behaviors in members, such as increased symptoms or “competing” to be the least healthy. Someone who thinks of their depression as a significant part of their identity is impeding healing. Framing my identity around “I have social anxiety” would be detrimental to my growth as a person. DID/OSDD-1 are slight exceptions to this because they so heavily involve identity by default, but we’ve posted before about why making them too large a factor in one’s identity is counter productive to healing.

Despite all of these things, a Tumblr user (@sherlocksflataffect) decided that taking the concept of “neuroatypical / neurodiverse” and simply changing the term to “neurodivergent” meant that they could include also all mentally ill individuals under the label. *Attributing the concept of neurodiversity to them, as if they did more than taking an existing concept and slapping a new label on it, is a form of historical revisionism.* (They themselves are guilty of historical revisionism; they claim that neurodiverse was only for autism and maybe learning disabilities, ignoring its coverage of other neurodevelopmental disorders in order to push their narrative that it was too “exclusive.” They also pretend like mentally ill people don’t have their own movements, such as the Mad Pride movement, in order to justify trying to collapse movements.) That they also have autism does not mean that they speak for the entire community and had the right to open up a neurodevelopmental term to be for everyone.

That @sherlocksflataffect takes the position that autistic or otherwise neurodevelopmentally disabled individuals who disapprove of their decision are “elitist” or “supremacist” is flat out disgusting and erasing. They hold up their status as “multiply neurodivergent” as if many autistic or otherwise neurodevelopmentally disabled people aren’t also mentally ill. It implies that the issue is only us mean neurodevelopmentally disabled people not wanting to be associated with mentally ill people. It ignores that *mentally ill people do not have the right to forcefully co-opt our movements when it suits them and then distance themselves from us when it doesn’t.* We don’t take issue with sharing spaces with mentally ill people, we take issue with mentally ill people not respecting our spaces. The blanket concept of neurodivergent gives people with mental illnesses an excuse to do just that.

*Neurotypical was meant to indicate that someone did not have a neurodevelopmental or neurological disorder, not that they were perfectly mentally healthy.* Calling someone with a mental illness “neurotypical” is not erasing their mental illness, it’s stating their relationship to neurodevelopmental individuals; if they are not neurodevelopmentally disabled, they are not one of us. Mental illnesses and developmental disorders aren’t the same, and mentally ill people are not necessarily any more respectful of developmentally disordered individuals than any “neurotypical” is. Their disorder does not give them the right to invade our spaces, to use our terms, or to redefine our terms to suit themselves (such as “stimming” suddenly being open to anyone and being slowly redefined to be more about playing with slime than about anything that’s immediately visibly associated with developmental disabilities).

*Conflating mental illness and developmental disabilities erases our differences.* It makes it harder for developmentally disabled individuals to talk about our unique experiences and struggles. It enables mentally ill individuals to not examine how they treat individuals with developmental disorders. Because many mental illnesses do seriously require treatment, it pushes a cure narrative on developmentally disabled people and minimizes our fight against the cure narrative. It erases the history of the neurodiversity movement, erasing the battles and achievements of developmentally disabled individuals that were not fought by non-developmentally disabled mentally ill individuals. 

With all of these things in mind, I strongly believe that DID does not stop someone from being neurotypical even if they fit a Tumblr’s definition of “neurodivergent.” DID is not a developmental or neurological disorder. It doesn’t form because of abnormal development, it manifests as abnormal development and forms because of repeated or long-term trauma, disorganized or insecure attachment, and a genetic predisposition to dissociate. DID is a dissociative disorder and, less directly, a posttraumatic stress disorder. Dissociative disorders and posttraumatic stress disorders require certain outside stimuli, and dissociative and posttraumatic stress disorders other than DID (and possibly OSDD-1) can begin at any age. This isn’t how developmental disorders function. 

“Developmental disorders” isn’t a catch-all label. These disorders pertain to significant difficulties with self care, receptive and expressive language, learning, mobility, executive functioning, abstract thought, and general ability to understand and interact with the world. Examples include autism spectrum disorder, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, specific learning disorders (such as dsylexia and dyscalculia), communication disorders (such as social (pragmatic) communication disorder), motor disorders (such as dyspraxia and Tourette Syndrome), and intellectual disabilities, and overlap between these disorders is common. As well, certain genetic disorders such as Rett Syndrome, Down Syndrome, or Fragile-X Syndrome can serve as the cause for a developmental disorder and so be noted as associated features. This is also true for factors such as epilepsy, very low birth weight, and fetal alcohol exposure, though these are not on their own indicative of a developmental disorder.

A disorder can be present during childhood and involve a failure to reach a normal developmental milestone (such as emotional control or integration of one self) without being a developmental disorder. I maintain that just as not all disorders are neurodevelopmental disorders, not all disorders stop one from being neurotypical.

So yes, I do consider people with DID who don’t have a neurodevelopmental or neurological disorder to be neurotypical. That they fit the ever widening label of “neurodivergent” (which, by the way, is apparently so broad that it includes being gifted) doesn’t matter in the slightest to me.

-Katherine of Those Interrupted


*Note: the idea of “neurodiversity” generally doesn’t mesh with referring to “developmental disorders / disabilities”, terms like “ADHD” or “Tourette Syndrome”, or anything else that references medicalization or pathology. That said, I felt the language used here was necessary for clarity.

On community fracturing

It seems like there’s two frameworks for what the queer community is and how it functions: the oppression model and the possibility model.

The oppression model says people are queer because they are oppressed for certain behaviors and that oppression takes a certain form. It says that the queer community was formed specifically to respond to a certain form of oppression. The activism in this model tends to focus on specific actions to benefit specific groups, which means that priorities must be made for who is prioritized over whom.

Under this model, you need receipts to prove that you belong. There is gatekeeping because the main function is to separate the oppressed from the oppressors and give the oppressed resources to fight the oppressors, as well as to provide spaces entirely free of out-group members. It empowers those who are best represented to act as gatekeepers, deciding who does and doesn’t belong. This provides what I am sure is a profound sense of safety to in-group members. It also means that those who cannot produce those receipts – including many gnc, m-spec, and a-spec people – are entirely excluded.

The possibility model says that people are queer because they embrace gender and interpersonal structures that run counter to the mainstream. Under this model, the boundaries of the community are nebulous and include people who aren’t necessarily directly harmed but who feel a disconnect and conflict between their internal sense of who they are and what society dictates as proper self-expression and behavior. 

Under this model, receipts are not required, just a sense that your personal identity runs counter to what the mainstream accepts and acknowledges. There is activism under this model, but the activism tends to focus on changing the culture to make room for all possibilities, not on championing for one specific group or another. Gatekeeping cannot coexist with this model, because of the nebulous and ever-changing nature of self-definition.

Clearly, I favor the latter model. But the point of this post isn’t to raise one above another. It’s to point out that the fracturing of the queer community seems to come down to which model an individual has accepted. Which is why arguments on one side often fall on deaf ears on the other side. We literally don’t want the same things.

I honestly don’t know how to bridge this divide, but I imagine it has to do with pulling back from these intra-community flights to figure out what we are actually trying to accomplish. If your goal is to make a safe place for lesbians, for example, it makes sense to exclude non-lesbians. And it may also make sense to define what a lesbian is, so that it is easier to make that determination. But if you’re looking to actually achieve cultural acceptance for non-straight individuals, I cannot understand how it benefits anyone to keep throwing different groups under the bus.

I’m trans. During the gay marriage fight, I was told time and time again that this had to come first, before the community addressed my issues. Well, we have gay marriage now. And what did it do for the trans community? It redirected queerphobes’ energy onto us, in the form of bathroom bills. Conservatives know they can’t challenge gay marriage anymore, so they’re going after more vulnerable parts of the community.

Except that these groups hate all queer people, not just trans people. And when gay people tacitly allow the rest of the community to be demonized, that is creating space to maintain hatred for the whole community. Because queerphobes don’t care how someone identifies. They hate anyone that is non-straight. So saying that it’s ok to hate certain parts of the community is really just maintaining hatred for the whole of the community.

So what are you trying to accomplish? A temporary sense of safety that only encompasses those who can and will provide receipts for others – information nobody should ever have to divulge – or a true cultural change that will make the world safer for everyone, not just those who belong to the in-group?

This is an important time. We need to come together to push for full equality – and maybe it’s just me, but I don’t know how we can do that when we’re still distracted by who is and is not allowed to belong.

Because I’ve known a lot of straight people. Even some who could claim queerness if they wanted to. But guess what? People don’t do that. Maybe online, because you can be anyone online, but not in the real world. Who is going to increase their chances of death if they don’t have to?

So maybe we can shift our energy from hypothetical out-group members infiltrating our groups – as if allies weren’t allowed anyway – and focus on, you know, not dying.

[ And no, I will not stop using “queer”. I’ve been using it for two decades without issue and I’m not going to stop just because it’s suddenly considered a slur. If you don’t like that word, there are many many extensions out there to prevent you from ever seeing it. ]

MariChat May Days 26, 27, & 29: The Stray, Baking, and The Argument.

I’m back, guys!  And playing catch up.  I managed to incorporate three prompts into this one update, so woohoo for that!

For anyone who is curious, my grandmother passed late Friday night, and I spent the weekend with my family.  I am grieving her loss, but I am relieved that she’s at peace now.  I am dedicating this chapter to her, she who loved to cook and bake and care for the people around her.



“Now, we just have to wait for them to bake.”  Marinette set the timer on the stove with a flourish, and turned to see Chat Noir regarding her with interest.  “It’ll only take about 8 minutes, so I’m going to get started on clean up.”

“Only 8 minutes, really?”

“Well, it depends on the recipe,” she shrugged, beginning to run hot water into the sink.  “But cookies don’t usually take very long.”

“Huh.”  He shifted his gaze to the oven.  “I never knew that there was so much chemistry in baking.”

“Do you want to watch?”

He looked surprised.  “Can I?”

Smiling, she dried her hands and crossed back to the oven, flipping a switch on the panel to turn on the oven light and giggling at the delight on his face as he crouched in front of the oven.  She went back to the sink, and began washing up the bowls and measuring spoons they’d dirtied. “I guess it is kind of cool, the way all of the different ingredients come together.  Tweaking the quantity of one thing, or changing the temperature of another, or even the order in which things are added can really change the way the cookies turn out.”

Chat nodded, watching in rapt fascination as the cookies puffed up in the oven.  “It’s really just chemistry.”  Marinette giggled again, and he looked back at her in confusion.  “What’s so funny?”

“You.  You’re such a dork.”

He stood, looking highly offended.  “Excuse me, I am a nerd, thank you very much!”

“Dork.”  She nodded decisively, hands still in the soapy water.  “Definitely a dork.”

“No, I am an anime-watching, video-game-playing, science-loving nerd.”  He crossed his arms stubbornly.

“Oh, well, that’s too bad.”  Marinette placed the last bowl on the drying rack, and toweled off her hands, leaning into the corner by the sink.   “Because these cookies are only for dorks.”

Chat sputtered.  “But I helped make those!”

“Sorry, we’ve got a strict ‘dorks only’ policy when it comes to stray cats.”  She shrugged helplessly.  “House rules.”

“I see.”  He wandered over to lean thoughtfully against the counter next to her, and smiled shyly.  “What if I wasn’t a stray cat anymore?  I could be a lost boy, instead.”

She straightened in surprise, and darted a nervous glance at her parents, who were engrossed with the TV in the living room.  “But, my parents, they don’t know—”

“Yes we do, dear,” Sabine chimed in without taking her eyes from the screen, and both teens whirled in shock.  “We’ve just been waiting for him to be ready to share it with us himself.”

“What??”  Marinette shrieked.

“I—er, what?”  stammered a flustered Chat Noir at the same time.  “You know who I am?”

“Of course, Adrien.”  Tom paused the TV with a chuckle at their flabbergasted expressions, and Sabine flashed him a grateful smile.  “We figured it out the night that you tried to make hot cocoa for Marinette.”

The oven timer began to beep, but it didn’t seem to register for either of them.  They just stood at the counter with identical expressions of shock.

Sabine smiled knowingly, and gestured for Tom to un-pause their movie.  “Marinette dear, your cookies are going to burn.”

Marinette shrieked again, and ran for the oven mitts.

Never Home (or How Lila Rossi Tased Chat Noir)

A (somewhat) late addition for Week 2 of TOTLS Month. Balcony scenes may not be canon (yet) but here’s a Lilanoir remix of a Marichat staple!


From the moment Lila step foot into her apartment, she knew that she wasn’t alone.

This was largely because she had come home to an empty apartment every day for the last several months, and having grown so used to the empty feeling associated with it, she knew something was just a little off. There was an indescribable presence lingering in the air as she made her way into the kitchen, setting a bag of groceries down and reaching for the small, electric taser she kept in her purse at all times. Her parents would have never let her live alone without protection, and though she had never had the opportunity to use it, she had seen enough horror movies at one in the morning to know how to turn it on whenever the floorboards creaked awkwardly.

Powering the taser on, she made a great show of pretending to be oblivious to the intruder’s presence, stretching lazily as she turned on an Italian news station and made her way from room to room, making a quiet sweep of the small apartment as she went. Humming a tune under her breath, she made sure the bathroom and her wardrobe room were clear before heading into her bedroom, stepping out onto the balcony and breathing in the cool evening air.

After a moment, she turned around, heading back inside with a small sigh, about to slip out of her school clothes when a pair of glowing green eyes caught her attention.

The intruder froze, hand clutched around a can of water that was trickling into the potted plant next to Lila’s desk. It was too dark to see anything but the intruder’s eyes, and Lila wasn’t exactly in the mood to give strange men in her home the benefit of the doubt. As the bandit opened his mouth to say something, Lila’s survival instinct kicked in, prompting her to lunge at the assailant, taser crackling as she launched herself at the intruder like jungle cat. The man dropped the watering can with a clanging splash as Lila threw him to the ground, taser pressed against his neck as she realized she had just threw one of Paris’ resident superheroes to the floor of her apartment.

And not even the one she didn’t like.

“What…the hell are you doing here?!” Lila spluttered.

“Your…fichus…was…dying,” Chat panted.

Keep reading

Drabble: Two Pink Lines

You and Chris Evans, your significant other, sit side by side on the floor of your master bathroom listening to a kitchen timer tick away the seconds.

You’ve suspected, for a couple days, that you might be pregnant, but you didn’t want to take a test until Chris could be there with you. He finally got back from his promo tour last night, but you waited until this morning to tell him your suspicions.

He had waited in the bedroom for you to take the tests, but then had come into the bathroom when you’d started the timer.

1 minute down. 2 to go.

The wait is nerve wrecking for both of you as you sit there. You both desperately want kids and you’ve been trying to get pregnant without officially “trying to get pregnant”. That’s changing now that is contract with Marvel is up. He has several movies coming out this year, but knocking you up is the only job he says he is signing up for.

2 minutes down. 1 to go.

Dread fills your stomach. What if you aren’t pregnant?

As if sensing your fear, Chris squeezes your hand three times, a wordless way of telling you he loves you.

You were up front with him when you met and fell in love that your mom and sister had difficulties getting pregnant, but that didn’t change his mind about you. Becoming a dad was important to him, but he insisted that the manner in which he becomes a dad (naturally, sergeancy, or adoption) doesn’t matter to him.

The timer’s shrill bell rings through the otherwise silent room.

“Get up and look,” he says.

“I can’t. You do it.”

This goes on for another minute or so, before he says, “We’ll both do it. Close your eyes and stand up. We’ll count to three and then open our eyes.”

You nod and close your eyes before standing up. You face the counter where the identical pregnancy tests sit.

“One,” Chris says, after getting up.

“Two,” you echo.

There is a pause, but Chris finally says, “Three.”

You peek through one eye to make sure he opened his eyes and find him peeking at you through one eye.

Laughing, you both open your eyes and turn your gaze in unison to the counter top. A gasp rips through the bathroom as your eyes see a pair of pink lines on not one, but both of the tests.

Tears spring to your eyes as you turn and bury your face in Chris’s chest. You can hear him crying as his strong arms hold you close.

When the sniffling and the tears stop for both of you, you pull out of his embrace at smile at him. “We’re having a baby!” you say in a whisper.

With tears threatening to spill out of his eyes again, he nods his head. His eyes drop to your stomach and his hands soon follow. After pushing your shirt up, he runs his hands over the currently flattish skin under which your baby is developing.

A random thought

This could easily be meaningless, but I thought I’d throw it out anyway since I haven’t seen anyone else mention it. If nothing else, maybe it’ll spawn some interesting fan theories.

I’ve seen various posts from other fandoms talking about how a lot of times in fiction a person wearing gloves means they have something to hide. That may not necessarily be true in all fictional series, but it is interesting.

So we all make fun of know that Keith wears fingerless gloves. And then as of season 2, it is confirmed that Keith is half-Galra. He, of course, was completely unaware of it until he started noticing little clues and then finally, the big reveal.

And then we have Shiro. If you look closely, he wears fingerless gloves too. And he has that missing year when he was a prisoner of the Galra. He (and by extension, us) has been getting little flashes of what all happened, but there is still a lot that we don’t know.

But who else wears fingerless gloves?

(Counter-point could be that Pidge does not wear gloves of any kind and she was hiding her identity, but counter-counter-points, 1) whether she goes by Pidge Gunderson or Katie Holt doesn’t seem to have much of an effect on the plot, and 2) She was/is aware of her secret whereas Shiro and Keith are/were not aware of their secrets.)

For You

Wonwoo is one of my svt biases omg
-Admin A

Originally posted by jeonswonwu

You yawned as you glanced at the clock, it was late and your eyes kept trying to close by themselves and it took everything you had just to stay awake. You took a cold shower, exercised, even slapped yourself in the face a few times, anything to keep you from falling asleep before Wonwoo got here. You downed your third shot of coffee in the last hour as a knock sounded at your door and you all but ran to open it, launching yourself into your boyfriend’s arms.

“Took you long enough!” you exclaimed and he laughed as he caught you against his chest. Wonwoo held onto your waist, walking you backwards back into your apartment so he could close the door behind him.

“You didn’t have to wait up for me, Jagi. You look tired,” Wonwoo smiled down at you as he lightly pushed you down onto the couch, sitting beside you.

“You said you had something for me?” you fidgeted in his arms, “what is it?”

“You’ve had too much coffee,” he sighed, frowning as you bounced up and down on the couch, “It’s bad to drink coffee this late, Y/N,”

“Whatever,” you scoffed, “gimme the goods” you reached for his gym bag and he pulled it out of your reach.

“I don’t have anything for you,” he laughed at your pouted expression, reaching out to smooth his thumb across the worry lines on your forehead.

“Don’t lie to me,” you protested but he was already pulling something out of the bag, placing it on your lap. You ran your hands over the top, it was a soft light blue fabric, and you unfolded it to find it was one of Wonwoo’s sweaters.

“You’re giving me your sweater?” you raised an eyebrow.

“No,” he countered, pulling an identical, though slightly faded, sweater from his bag, “I’m giving you your sweater,”

You grinned at him, pulling the soft fabric of your head. It smelled like Wonwoo, and you turned to smile sheepishly at him.

“I may have worn it for a while,” he blushed and you hugged him, pushing him backwards so he was lying down on your couch. You wrapped your arms around his neck, settling in beside him. You buried your face in the crook of his neck, sighing as he wrapped his arms around your waist. Your eyes fluttered shut and you felt Wonwoo chuckle below you.

“Jagi, I smell can I go shower,”

“Shh, I’m sleeping,” you whispered and Wonwoo sighed.

You kind of liked the way he smelled anyway.

Ficlet “Clarification”

Note: Prompted by  @grgiapeach‘s post here.

Summary: Post “Knots Untie.”  It bothers the F outta me that we don’t get to see Michonne and Carl together.  But I do think there will be a flashback of somekind in the season finale.  In short, here’s a fill in the blank.  Rick and Michonne bring boxes of groceries into their house…

“Carl,” Rick greeted with a nod of his head.  “Where’s Judith?” he asked, setting a box down on the counter.  Michonne placed an identical one next to his, and began to unpack jarred goods.

“She’s taking a nap,” Carl replied, watching both of them carefully.  “We have groceries now?”

“Yep.  Vegetables, seeds, and even a cow.  Well, the cow’s coming,” Rick explained.  Michonne took a jar from his hand, giving him a small smile.

“Rick, why don’t you go upstairs to shower and change.”

“What?”  Rick looked down to where her eyes had traveled–there were still blood stains on his shirt and coat.  “Oh yeah.  I’ll be back in a bit.”  He gave her hand a squeeze, smiling at her, lingering for a bit, then headed out of the kitchen and up the stairs, leaving Michonne alone with Carl.

“You gonna help me with these groceries or not?” Michonne asked, turning her back to him, resuming what she was doing.  Though he didn’t answer, Carl walked over next to her, taking items out of the box.

“So…you’re not avoiding me,” he said, putting a big jar of pickles in the cupboard.

“Why would I do that?” Michonne replied, though she didn’t make any eye contact with him.

Carl sighed.  “Michonne, you haven’t looked at me once since this morning in the hallway.”

Slowly, Michonne turned to him, and looked at him straight on, unwavering, chin held high.  Then she wavered, looking away again, leaning heavily against the back counter.  “I just…That wasn’t the plan.”

“What was the plan?” he asked, a joking tone coloring his voice.

Michonne shrugged.  “I don’t know what the plan was, but it wasn’t that.”

“It’s okay.”

“Carl–”

“No, really.  When I asked Jesus what he was doing, he said he was waiting for my mom and dad to get dressed.”

Michonne, visibly embarrassed, turned away from him.  Carl stepped in front of her, making her look at him.

“It didn’t jar me–not him referring to you as my mom. The getting dressed thing was confusing, but only for like five seconds.  Honestly, I thought, ‘About time.’”

Michonne looked at him, curious.  “You did?”

“Well, yeah.  You guys have always…I don’t know.  I just wasn’t surprised.  And, it felt right.  I mean, this is…it’s not temporary, right?” he asked quietly.

“No,” Michonne said, shaking her head.  “I…we…I’m not going anywhere.”

“Good,” Carl said with a nod, satisfied, resuming putting the items away.  Then he added, “Took you long enough to figure it out.”

“Oh?” Michonne said lightly.  “Figure out what?”

Carl gave a casual shrug.  “That you’re a Grimes, too.”

cifume  asked:

Ahh it's kinda late where I am right now, but I'd like to drop by and ask. I've read some of your theories on Juuzou so far, I was wondering if you know anything about Juuzou mentioning a drag queen ghoul back in chapter 93. And if you do, is there anything we can draw from there with regards to Big Madam's trans theory?

Okay, so I have seen that going around. I don’t speak Japanese, so I would really appreciate it if someone who did could tell me exactly what is said in those panels. This is the translation that I read:

In context, it actually makes more sense that Juuzou is referring to the possibility of a male homosexual ghoul than a crossdresser, drag queen, or transgender person in these panels. 

1) Shinohara is making a point about physical appearance, and that the people who were killed were all (a) male and (b) physically attractive and thin. Therefore, he says, the ghoul would be a (straight) woman. 

2) Juuzou counters by pointing out that the ghoul could be a (gay) male. 

Since cross dressing/doing drag/being trans isn’t a sexual orientation, but rather a hobby, lifestyle, or identity, countering Shinohara’s assertion regarding the sexual preferences of the ghoul with that information wouldn’t really make much sense. If Shinohara is referring to a mix of gender and sexuality, then drag doesn’t apply.

As far as the Big Madam being trans theory, I’ll admit, it’s not my favorite. I feel as though this fandom jumps on every character’s gender in a way that feels quite fetishizing. It happened in TG with Juuzou, then in :RE with Mutsuki (and Kanae, strangely), and now with Big Madam. Additionally, Big Madame’s body type does not suggest that she went through puberty with testosterone sex hormones. In order to look the way that she does, she would have needed years of hormone treatment, hair removal, and surgery, unless she was on hormone blockers + estrogen from pre-pubescence on. So, that’s not completely out of the question, but it also makes it more plausible that another mechanism is in place, here, especially considering that ghoul surgery is no mean feat, and we don’t know how hormones affect their bodies.

I might not stress the physical aspect very hard, except that we do have a canon cross-dressing natal male in this series, Nico, and Ishida very much draws him that way. Additionally, Mutsuki looks exactly as you would expect a young trans man to look if he hadn’t taken hormones, or hadn’t been on them for very long. So I feel as though Ishida does have a handle on the physicality side of this. Of course, transgender people can look a variety of ways, and this isn’t me asserting that there’s no merit whatsoever in the theory. What I am saying, I suppose, is that it is a theory and that there are other things to be considered. 

Again, the theory I much prefer is the one that my partner came up with; that Juuzou viewed Big Madam as a complete parent, that her maternal side was one he associated with violence, and that her paternal side was one that he associated with love. This association would explain why Shinohara was able to access his emotions and bond with him, and could also be used as an explanation as to why he seems to bond more with males in the series. We do see him interacting with Akira Mado, but much differently than he does with Shinohara, Hanbee, Amon, and Haise. 

Only time (and Ishida) will tell. 

April 27, 2011

By Skyler10

Summary: Rose thinks Tentoo has forgotten her birthday. She couldn’t be more wrong.

Notes: Pure romance/fluff for the @timepetalsprompts “birthdays/celebrations.” Credit/inspiration for the end by the great @tinyconfusion. Thanks to the lovely @starsovergallifrey and @imdefinitelyamadgirlwithoutalife answering my question about Rose’s somewhat-canon birth date. 


If her boyfriend were a normal human male, Rose would have teased him about his forgetfulness. She would have rolled her eyes and poked him in the side, like she did about so many other things.

But she forgave his absentmindedness without remark, at least when it came to losing track of the hour and not remembering important dates.

When the Lord of Time becomes part-human but makes peace with it for your sake because there’s nothing he loves as much as you, including all those things that make him alien… you learn to forgive and hold him that much closer at night.

So Rose wasn’t sad (or at least, was trying not to be sad) that he hadn’t even mentioned her birthday tomorrow.

Keep reading

Being Black—but Not Too Black—in the Workplace

Being a person of color at a predominantly white workplace creates its own special kinds of stress. 

To be a black professional is often to be alone. Most black doctors, lawyers, journalists, and so on—those in white-collar positions that require specialized training and credentialing—work in environments where they are in the racial minorityThis comes with challenges. Beyond outright discrimination, which many still face, there are psychological costs to being one of just a few black faces in a predominantly white environment. In a study of black professional workers in a number of different occupations, I found that these employees worked to carefully manage their emotions in ways that reflected the racial landscapes they inhabited.

In particular, black professionals had to be very careful to show feelings of conviviality and pleasantness, even—especially—in response to racial issues. They felt that emotions of anger, frustration, and annoyance were discouraged, even when they worked in settings where these emotions were generally welcomed in certain contexts—think litigators interacting with opposing counsel, or financial analysts responding to a stressful day on Wall Street. Interestingly, this often played out at trainings meant to encourage racial sensitivity. Many of the black professionals I interviewed found that diversity trainings—intended to improve the work environment for minorities—actually became a source of emotional stress, as they perceived that their white colleagues could use these trainings to express negative emotions about people of color, but that they were expected not to disclose their own honest emotional reactions to such statements.


One of the most interesting recent contributions to this area of research comes from legal scholars Mitu Gulati and Devon Carbado. In their book Working Identity, they argue that while everyone needs to create and put forth an “appropriate” workplace identity, for members of minority groups—women of all races, racial-minority men, LGBTQ people—this becomes particularly taxing because their working identities must counter common cultural stereotypes. For example, black men may feel compelled to work longer hours as a way to repudiate stereotypes of a poor work ethic among blacks. To make matters more complicated, such strategies can backfire, reinforcing other stereotypes: Working those long hours may lead colleagues to assume that the workers lack the intellectual preparation needed for high-status professional jobs.

Carbado and Gulati also note that minority professionals tread cautiously to avoid upsetting the majority group’s sensibilities. Put simply, they can be visibly black, but don’t want to be perceived as stereotypically black. As Carbado and Gulati write, a black female candidate for a law firm who chemically straightens her hair, is in a nuclear family structure, and resides in a predominantly white neighborhood signals a fealty to (often unspoken) racial norms. She does so in a way that an equally qualified black woman candidate who wears dreadlocks, has a history of pushing for racial change in the legal field, is a single mother, and lives in the inner city does not.


The same is true for professional workers who are members of other racial minority groups. For instance, Latina attorneys may be able to advance further at work if they take pains not to speak with any trace of an accent. These are challenges in addition to the more well-known ones—the difficulties finding mentors of the same race, coping with racial stereotypes, being treated as a representative for one’s entire racial group.

So what does this mean for black workers in professional environments? First, it’s indicative of the degree to which race shapes occupational outcomes. In many circles, people feel more comfortable reducing racial issues to class-based ones, assuming that poverty explains much, if not all, of the differences between minorities and whites.

But for blacks in professional positions, issues of poverty are not the problem. Poverty does not explain biases in hiring, the need for particular types of emotional management, and the careful self-presentation that minority professionals engage in at work.

Second, all of this ought to encourage a rethinking of some of the existing efforts to create more diverse work environments. Do diversity and inclusion initiatives take into consideration how minorities placed in those environments feel? How can policies create not just more equitable hiring processes, but address the emotional toll of being a racial minority in a professional work setting?

In the current political climate, there is generally support for solving race-related employment challenges by focusing on job training and education—in other words, increasing human capital to improve access. Given the research, it’s also important to consider how to create better workplaces for the minority professionals who are already in these jobs.  


Source:TheAtlantic


American Eagle cartridge counter Luger

Only 50 produced. extremely rare 1902 DWM Luger that has been fitted with the unique “Powell Indicating Device”, commonly called a “Cartridge Counter” on the left side of the grip. Produced on order from the U.S. Board of Ordnance circa 1902-1903, the Cartridge Counter model is nearly identical to the 1900 Model Test Luger, with the addition of the Powell Device, which consisted of a magazine configured to have a cutout and guide screw extending through the left side, and a 3 ¼" long slot in the left grip, aligned to match the magazine, with a guide numbered one through seven and a celluloid window to protect the internals. The screw, connected to the magazine follower, rests at the “7” position when loaded, advancing upward with the follower as rounds are discharged, permitting the soldier to determine his remaining rounds by merely looking at the grip.