interpersonal values


Vetra: Our father didn’t die. Or maybe he did, we don’t really know. He just didn’t come home. He was involved in some bad things. Bad people. And eventually it caught up to him. There was no where to run. Not like a whole new galaxy.

Ryder: Is that why you came here? 

Vetra: When you’re young and stupid, you make bad decisions. Piss off the wrong people. That sorta thing never goes away. Not for you, not for the ones you care about.

I can’t help but think there’s a hell of a story behind this vague admission from Vetra Nyx. 

By her own acknowledgement, her dad got up to bad things with bad people, and so did she. Maybe she caught herself making his mistakes, the ones that might be the end of her just like it was the end of him. Once she was embedded in the life, maybe she started to see the warning signs in her own life that he missed, or ignored, or both - and she gets scared.

But what exactly happened? What were her bad decisions? Does she have people after her for her bad decisions? She was dealing with people bad enough that when she figured out that Kesh was supplying something big in a new galaxy, far away from her bad decisions, she saw the opportunity to cut and run.

Some folks like Suvi, Gil, and Liam are here for the adventure, but Vetra tells us several times, in several different ways how she sees Andromeda as a way to start over. 

The concept stands in stark contrast to her “you play the hand you’re dealt” motto. Does she delineate between the hand she’s been dealt and the cards she pulled from the deck? Taking care of Sid was the hand she was dealt, but not the smuggling or the people she chose to work with.

Does she ever tell Ryder about what happened, you think? About the bad people and the bad decisions? Maybe it’s something that she unloads one night as Ryder and she stay up late, sharing more and more personal stories, feeling out the depths of their trust in one another. A story not told for sympathy or advice, a story just shared, a history entrusted.

Vetra Nyx - what did you get up to out there in the Milky Way?

  • someone: maybe u could interact with people in a way that isnt offputtingly performative & self-promoting? maybe u could enjoy relationships for their inherent interpersonal value rather than as contributions to your perceived social status?
  • me: i dont understand

anonymous asked:

There isn't any evidence that ollie and wicks did anything for holster and ransom. I think it was just a "They deserve it as seniors" thing. Bitty was a key member of the team freshman year, but had little to do on a personal basis with Johnson. Chowder and Jack weren't close by any means except that Chowder was a key team member who remained positive. The only truly personal relationship is Lardo and Shitty...

i’m like, 90% sure i’ve addressed this somewhere but that somewhere could have been a DM, so i’ll review:

i think you’re not thinking correctly in terms of ‘personal relationship’ here. instead of 'what are their interactions with each other (dib givers to dub receivers) that i see’, think more in relation to 'what do their (the dib givers AND dib receivers) interactions with the team say about who they are as people?’

then, you’ll recognize that this new generation of dibbers gave dibs based on their interpersonal values, and interpersonal means relationships.

think about ransom and holster. what do you think about them first? well, it’s ransom and holster, hockey shit with ransom and holster, d-man pairing ransom and holster, best friend sundaes ransom and holster.

what does ngozi call ollie and wicks? the human personifications of a fist bump.

with jack and chowder, jack is hockey wunderkind extraordinaire. he, before samwell worked its magic, ate slept and breathed hockey. chowder is the type of player that embodies everything jack sees/believes in for good players, but i also think he’s the type of player that jack didn’t really think he could be? or wasn’t good at being at least in the first year. he cares about others on and off the ice, he’s a team player, he helped take them to the frozen four as a FRESHMAN.

he is a great hockey player and a great dude, hence, he gets hockey-prince-who-is-learning-the-value-of-friendship’s dibs.

Sometimes I think I’m crazy because I’m sad for no reason. I can still get up and go to work and uni but everything feels like a worry in my head . It’s cliche maybe to worry to much or to really overthink things but I feel like I’m constantly in overdrive thinking about things I say and how they might come across as insensitive or arrogant and it makes me feel worse. I’m trying to remember that this is positive learning ..To take into account for being more considerate in the future, and that I value my interpersonal relationships enough to want to make them better

But some days it’s really difficult. I am grateful to be in a good relationship both with my friends and romantically and I’m making work in some sort of direction but I suppose success isn’t proportionate to mental stability so whatever

anonymous asked:

Hi there! I'm really unsure if I'm an intj or an infj, could you give me any insight to how I can decide? Thanks! <3

Hello lovely!

Like I said before, I’ve personally found the best way to determine your MBTI type is taking a look at the different type’s cognitive functions and deciding which ones you relate to the most.

In your case, INTJ/INFJ, the cognitive function possibilities are:

(function descriptions taken from


-Ni (introverted intuition)

Looks at consistency of ideas and thoughts with an internal framework. Trusts flashes from the unconscious, which may be hard for others to understand.

-Te (extroverted thinking)

Seeks logic and consistency in the outside world. Concern for external laws and rules.

-Fi (introverted feeling)

Seeks harmony of action and thoughts with personal values. May not always articulate those values.

-Se (extroverted sensing)

Acts on concrete data from here and now. Trusts the present, then lets it go.


-Ni (introverted intuition)

Looks at consistency of ideas and thoughts with an internal framework. Trusts flashes from the unconscious, which may be hard for others to understand.

-Fe (extroverted feeling)

Seeks harmony with and between people in the outside world. Interpersonal and cultural values are important.

-Ti (introverted thinking)

Seeks internal consistency and logic of ideas. Trusts his or her internal framework, which may be difficult to explain to others.

-Se (extroverted sensing)

Acts on concrete data from here and now. Trusts the present, then lets it go.

Hope this helped!


Night on the Galactic Railroad, or the Apple, the Scorpion, and the Stars

From a series on Mawaru Penguindrum’s literary influences.

This place is cursed with spoilers.

Night on the Galactic Railroad (1927) is a novella by Kenji Miyazawa. It takes place in the fictional fairy tale country resembling Italy. There, on the night of the annual Centuarus Festival, two boys, Giovanni and Campanella, are whisked away on the titular Galactic Railroad to tour the heavens. While on this journey, they confront the nature of human connection, transience, and sacrifice. At the end of the story, Giovanni and Campanella part ways. Campanella was on the train because he drowned during the festival and was on his way to the afterlife, while Giovanni, still alive, was allowed on the journey with his friend.

Mawaru Penguindrum specifically seems to be influenced by the 1985 anime adaptation directed by Gisaburo Sugii. It’s a faithful adaptation, but it plays up the story’s somber parts. The darkness at Penguindrum’s core seems borrowed from this version of the story rather than the original. Shouma and Kanba resemble Giovanni and Campanella as realized in this version.

Giovanni (right) and Campanella (left) on the Galactic Railroad.

Like Giovanni, Shouma is associated with the color blue and has a sensitive, demure personality. Like Campanella, Kanba is associated with red and is determined, distant, but ultimately devoted to his friends. Unlike NotGR, however, Shouma and Kanba depart together at the end. It seems to me as if Ikuhara has dwelt on the sadness of Giovanni and Campanella’s parting at the end of the original story and, in Penguindrum, created a version where they could be together in the end. Penguindrum also explicitly references Kenji Miyazawa in its first and last scenes. Near the beginning of the first episode, a pair of children are walking out side the Takakura’s home discussing what the apple means in NotGR. You can tell because they mention Campanella and someone named Kenji - the novella’s author Kenji Miyazawa. This exact conversation repeats in the final moments of the last episode, but this time the boys have Shouma and Kanba’s hair colors and the audience follows them as they keep walking into the stars.


Night on the Galactic Railroad also contains the explanation for that scorpion metaphor! A lot of people get stuck on this - Kanba is referred to as a scorpion several times throughout Penguindrum, and allusions are made to him burning up. This is actually direct reference to NotGR, where the story of the burning scorpion exists as a fable told to the main characters as they’re on the train. You can see it in this clip:

“"My father told me its story: A long time ago in a field there lived a scorpion that ate other bugs by using its tale to catch them. Then one day he found himself cornered by a weasel. Fearing for his life, he ran but could not escape it. Suddenly, he fell into a well and, unable to climb out, began to drown. He started to pray then, saying: 

”‘Oh, God. How many lives have I stolen to survive? Yet when it came my turn to be eaten by the weasel, I selfishly ran away. And for what? What a waste my life has been! If only I’d let the weasel eat me, I could have helped him live another day. God, please hear my prayer. Even if my life has been meaningless, let my death be of help to others. Burn my body so that it may become a beacon, to light the way for others as they search for true happiness.’

“The scorpion’s prayer was answered, and his body became a beautiful crimson flame that shot up into the night sky. There he burns to this day. My father was telling the truth…”

From Night on the Galactic Railroad, translation by Julianne Neville. 

The fable of the scorpion fire is about sacrifice. The scorpion, who lived his life as a foul predator, faces something more powerful than him - the inevitability of death - and regrets that, after a life of heedless consumption, he couldn’t die in a way that aided the proliferation of life. The gods hear his prayers and set him on fire, turning him into the red star Antares, heart of the constellation scorpio, whose light aids life. 

From episode 12. Kanba offers his life to the Princess of the Crystal’s in exchange for Himari’s and, due to the purity of his sacrifice, it is acceptable. Unlike later on in the series, here Kanba is exhibiting the true nature of sacrifice.

This fable gives insight into Kanba’s motivations but not his actions. While the scorpion discovers his kinship with all life, Kanba is rushing headlong towards a sacrifice that nobody wants but him. Kanba views himself as a predator and wants his final, massive act of predation - the terrorist attack - to lead to some concrete good:  extending Himari’s life. His role as a man of action rather than a man of reflection (Shouma) binds him to Sanetoshi’s will, which offers a convenient means of achieving his goal. But those outs don’t exist in the real world, and these justifications can’t be made ahead of time. Shouma knew this and Kanba should have known. Maybe that’s why it’s Shouma, the brother with a more intuitive understanding of sacrifice, who bursts into flames and not Kanba, who fades away. Kanba’s identification with the scorpion represents misguided, emotionally selfish sacrifice - egoism - while Shouma, Ringo, and Momoka’s association with the purer flame represents true, transcendent sacrifice. 

From episode 24. Ringo casting the spell (“Let’s share the fruit of fate!”) and subjecting herself to the scorpion fire. 


There’s a scene late in the novella where Giovanni and Campanella encounter some people who died on the Titanic. The trio consists of two children and their governor, who allowed them all to die to make room for more people on the lifeboat. These people tell Giovanni and Campanella about the scorpion fire, and this is also where apples come into play. A lighthouse keeper, traveling down the train, gives them some apples, which they disperse amongst themselves. The film actually makes it so that the flocks of birds that they see flying outside the windows turn into the apples - something that wasn’t present in the original story. Apples as a metaphor for live sacrificing itself for the sustenance of more life seems to originate here, since that wasn’t tied to the apples in the original story. 

Christianity, apples symbolize knowledge and defilement. NotGR however, reclaims that image. Here, they represent people understanding their limitations as individuals and accepting community - and the necessity of making sacrifices for humanity’s greater good -  as a way to make up for their flaws. NotGR stresses over and over again that people value humanity or some abstract conception of “life” over themselves, and that this path leads to profound spiritual contentment. Penguindrum borrows this idea and the apple symbolism wholeheartedly, but emphasizes valuing one’s interpersonal relationships as a proxy for loving all life. 

From episode 20. Himari reinterprets the biblical Fall of Man as a good thing because it allowed humanity to experience connection and joy, however transient, alongside pain. 

One of the biggest mysteries left in Penguindrum to me is what Kanba sharing the apple with Shouma represents. I know what happened between Shouma/Himari and Kanba/Himari. Shouma brought the abandoned Himari into his family and Himari brought Kanba into the family after his father’s death. But what happened between Kanba and Shouma? How did Kanba have to save Shouma by sharing his fruit of fate? It’s left purely abstract - Shouma and Kanba were starving, Kanba shared his fruit, and both were saved by the gesture. Maybe Kanba helped Shouma by being assertive and dedicated in situations where he wasn’t naturally inclined towards that? Like Giovanni and Campanella, Kanba and Shouma have complementary existences. Giovanni couldn’t exist on his own without adopting some of Campanella’s traits, while Kanba and Shouma, although they acquiesce to each other a bit, ultimately reaffirm their paired existence. I opened this up to discussion with some people on twitter and Bryan Baxter suggested that the two boxes Kanba and Shouma are in during episodes 23 and 24 are their mothers’ wombs, and that by sharing the fruit of fate they became spiritual twins (they were born on the same day). Yoni Linder suggested that Kanba helped Shouma survive the KIGA group’s brainwashing when they were children. It is odd that Shouma, the Takakura actually born into the cult, is the one least susceptible to it.

The idea that there’s something beyond what we consider life is central to NotGR, which uses Christian imagery and often seems overtly Christian in its themes. Kenji Miyazawa was a devout practitioner of Nichiren Buddhism, but like many Japanese people his life was saturated with Christian imagery and scraps of biblical scripture. Christianity exists and is portrayed positively in NotGR, but neither Giovanni nor Campanella seem to be practitioners. When Giovanni and the children get into an argument over whose god is “real,” the tutor reconciles them by raising the possibility that their gods are one and the same and reminding them that the point of religion is true faith in what you believe. NotGR is thus a neutral but positive synthesis of Christian and Buddhist images towards a more generically humanist message.

“"And who says he’s the real God? I’ll be he’s a fake!”

“How would you know? Maybe the God you believe in is the fake.”

“No! He’s the real one!”

“Then tell me, what kind of God is your God?” asked the young man with a gentle smile.

“Well… to be honest, I’m not quite sure… but I do know he is the one true God,” Giovanni replied.

“Of course he is. There’s only one true God." 

"And my God is that one!”

“I agree. I can only pray that the two of you are seeing us off before that true God now,” the young man said, clasping his hands together. Kaoru also clasped her hands together.

Everyone was sad to be parting, and Giovanni was about to burst into tears.“

From Night on the Galactic Railroad, translation by Julianne Neville. 

Over time, it becomes clearer and clearer that one of the railroad’s purposes is to deliver people to the afterlife, two of which are represented by giant glowing crosses. "Dying for love” thus means something more concrete in NotGR than it does in Penguindrum. There’s an actual reward for doing it - entrance into heaven. The same isn’t true in Penguindrum, where the existence of an afterlife is much more abstract. Sanetoshi and Momoka were humans with some supernatural powers who died and became ghosts, but that form of afterlife seems much more a curse than a reward. In the last episode, Momoka vanishes from this world for good through some sort of opening, but exactly where she goes is unknown. Penguindrum’s final shot is of Shouma and Kanba, having died for love, walking into the stars. While characters do allude to god, the show as a whole seems nonreligious, more concerned with taking the aspects of stories it deems meaningful and applying them towards a new, secular humanist message. Here, god is synonymous with fate, chance, or destiny - the circumstances outside human control that one is subjected to and dictate life. So what is Kenji saying? I think he’s saying that humanity’s survival up to this point has been due to our ability to love each other, to willingly sacrifice for the greater good, and that this is the foundation for human existence. That's where everything really begins. 

The eight function attitudes

Se: Acts on concrete data from here and now. Trusts the present, then lets it go.

Si: Compares present facts and experiences to past experience. Trusts the past. Stores sensory data for future use.

 Ne: Sees possibilities in the external world. Trusts flashes from the unconscious, which can then be shared with others.

 Ni: Looks at consistency of ideas and thoughts with an internal framework. Trusts flashes from the unconscious, which may be hard for others to understand.

 Te: Seeks logic and consistency in the outside world. Concern for external laws and rules.

 Ti: Seeks internal consistency and logic of ideas. Trusts his or her internal framework, which may be difficult to explain to others.

 Fe: Seeks harmony with and between people in the outside world. Interpersonal and cultural values are important.

 Fi: Seeks harmony of action and thoughts with personal values. May not always articulate those values.

You guys ever realized that Teru is the best choice for Dimple's meat shield?

Dimple needs to find a way to perusade Mob in a pacifist (sort of) and convincing way, so he uses the people closest to Mob’s heart: the main characters respectively. Since those guys play the most important roles in Mob’s life and the ones who pretty much been with his struggles (most of it) with psychic powers and people; Reigen as his mentor, Ritsu as his brother/family, Dimple as his guide, and Teru as his friend. These people act as Mob’s support (admittedly, BIC also plays a role but it’s kinda obvious ONE made them secondary characters but they’re important nonetheless).

This Arc is important in portraying Mob’s growth, ONE did say that Mob is truly weak and that he’s lucky to have strong people support him (both literally and figuratively). It also parallels Hanazawa, LOL, and a bit of Mogami arcs. The TeruMob rematch, Dimple being Mob’s enemy, and the latter being in a situation where he can’t rely on anyone.

Teru’s role significantly became major currently compared to other arcs. His only vital roles was in Hanazawa arc, Infiltration arc, and CLAW arc. He played a minor role in Separation arc. Maybe this arc shows Teru’s importance to Mob and his growth and perhaps character development.

Now this’ll show if Mob has truly grown; on will he be able to handle the situation on his own. If he had grown, he won’t be persuaded by the people he cared about through feelings of guilt and being left out of the group and continues to keep his ground.

Like I said, Dimple needs a meat shield because he can’t risk talking Mob vis-a-vis else he’ll be exorcised (a coward, that booger is). And the best choice is someone close to his heart (thus brainwashing Tsubomi, Reigen, and Ritsu), because Mob values interpersonal relationships more than anything and these people are very influential to him. If they would ever going ruin their relationship with him because of his actions, Mob will attempt to fix this. However, there is a possibility Mob is going to use brute force, he needs someone who can go toe on toe with Mob but simultaneously close to him and very persuasive.

Reigen’s out of the question, since he can’t fight for shit and when he talked to Mob it didn’t work. Using Tsubomi will cause Mob to explode. The same applies to Ritsu, and he’s not even on Mob’s level. If the latter would ever hurt his brother, Dimple won’t be able to reason with Mob and he’s out. So, Dimple’s last resort and only choice is Teru; powerful? Yes. Close to Mob? Yes. Does Mob rely on him? Yes. Since fightingTeru won’t trigger Mob’s 100% quickly; he’ll try to snap him out of it first, giving Dimple many opportunities to convert Mob. If Teru would ever lose to Mob (I doubt Mob is going to fight him tbh), Dimple can twist Mob’s guilt to dissuade him on opposing him.

If Mob has truly grown, he won’t fight Teru. Nor get convinced. Will he be break when the people he cares about turns against him and be swept away? Or will he be strong, and remain frigid like a rock in the middle of a powerful river? Will Mob be strong enough to stand alone? Or would he crave being one with the crowd, thus being convinced?

ONE-sensei is truly amazing at giving hints and plot factors. I can’t wait for the next chapter!

i feel like a lot of times when desirability gets brought up as a point of conversation it gets interpreted as boiled down to an individual experience or merely abt the frequency with which culturally ugly folks have sex, or the access to sex partners we have which, sure, is a part of the conversation but it is not THE conversation, and this becomes a very easy way for folks to shut the conversation down, by framing us as somehow ungrateful or greedy or demanding or entitled.

but our desire and desirability is not just about who we do or want to have sex with, or who or how often people want to have sex with us. it informs how we treat people in the larger world

i went out with a friend who is a woman and also fat a few weeks ago. the person behind the counter was a very thin gay man who, i felt, was visibly and obviously made uncomfortable or disgusted by my size and actively avoided making eye contact with me, or looking at me at all. because my fatness has trained me to gauge other peoples reactions to my body, to see where their eyes go– whether they make great efforts to avoid mine, or linger a little bit too long as they slowly read my body was silent disapproval. i notice. when we left, my friend commented on how cute and friendly he was to her, and i told her my experience with him. she was offended on my behalf and asked what i thought abt his character as a person– like if i thought he was exceptionally rude or a terrible person. i just responded that his actions were perfectly common and absolutely in line with social power. it would be easy to dismiss these encounters as individualistic and down to scenarios, but these are the structures that shape our lives. this is the way we are taught to treat those who we are taught are undesirable (even if we do, in fact, desire them), and we are supported in it.

there was a time recently when i was struggling with hearing abt my queer male friends’ sex and dating lives. i dont want to struggle with it, and i want to be there for my friends. i have been trying to figure out where these feelings come from and how there can be space for all of our feelings and experiences. what i have realized is that it isn’t just about hearing how many people someone goes home with from a bar, or what kind of attention another gets on sex and dating apps that i don’t. while those things hurt as a stark reminder of our different experiences and the ways that we are differently (and, in my case, less) valued in queer community. it is also that they can disappear whenever this becomes a bigger aspect of their lives, that our friendship remains dependent on the ebb and flow of their sexual capital, where mine remains stagnant. this is a way that desirability politics are replicated in intimate relationships– a phrase i use intentionally to highlight the intimacy of friendships. where i make efforts (and sometimes, too, fail) at treating my friends like lovers as a political act to disrupt the hierarchy of romance in our lives on principle, in many ways it also because these are the relationships that sustain me where i cannot count on a lover, or even the potential of one, to in the same ways. i also do not believe that this is specific to queer male relationships and they are not the only context in which i have felt this particular kind of abandonment in the name of sex or love. and to a certain extent i have been guilty of this myself at times, for i am not above replicating these hierarchies, these politics, as much as i try to be conscious of them. the fact remains that these structures of desire inform how we treat even those most valuable to us.

regardless of who are or wanting to have sex with– or if we want to have a sex with– sexuality remains an undercurrent how we value and honor people and are treated in the larger world. this is where the focal point of conversations about desirability should be. it remains important to me to interrogate desire– not to then become attracted to everyone, but to be aware of what powers are informing my desire and what i am upholding with my desire– but also so that culturally ugly folks who remain publicly and visibly undesired can still receive the justice of interpersonal value and appreciation.

anonymous asked:

I am very new to writing and literature thing (My calling has always been Psychology until a sudden change of heart for fiction writing). I just seem to really struggle with creating a character voice, in my dialog. Do you have any tips to help give my characters their own voice?

Put that interest in psychology to good use! One of the most useful tools in your writer’s toolbox when it comes to writing in someone else’s voice is understanding how the mind works. 

For example, someone who comes from a more unstable background - for example, someone who didn’t have a good family environment as a kid, who moved around a lot and never had a strong support system - is going to be on the lookout for risks regardless of the environment they’re in. 

They are less likely to be able to easily connect with other people, and when they do make connections they’re still going to emphasize self-reliance over asking for help or working as a part of a team. In terms of the way they speak - whether out loud or in their own head - they’re going to be a lot more likely to hold back their opinions, insecurities, fears - even their positive emotions. 

On the flip side, a character from a very secure environment may be a bit more open and honest with their feelings, and expect others to be completely open with them. They will probably look for commonalities - things they can use to make a connection - rather than things that may indicate risk or danger. They’re going to take security for granted, and will likely place security lower in their list of priorities than relationship-building with others. 

To use yet another HP example, consider the differences between Harry and Ron. Harry is honestly surprised when people want to build relationships, whereas relationships are natural for Ron. Harry places a stronger value on interpersonal relationships (having had no experience with them prior to heading to Hogwarts) while Ron takes these kinds of relationships for granted and often places a stronger value on fame or notoriety (as a result of being the youngest son in a fairly accomplished family). 

You can see a lot of this in the way they act and interact with one another. Harry has a snarky sense of humor, whereas Ron is a bit more blunt. Ron also openly teases as a way of showing friendship (”Ah, two Neptunes. ‘Tis a sure sign that a midget in glasses is being born,”) but it would be fairly shocking to see Harry making this kind of joke. Makes sense, as Harry would be a bit more worried about potentially alienating people.

Oh look at that, I wrote an essay again :) 

art goals
  • makes viewers gay
  • forces viewers to confront the gender binary personally 
  • makes viewers value interpersonal intimacy
  • entices viewers to fight the establishment, systematic corruption, and j.k. rowling