reductive thinking

What does Stan’s symbol mean?

First of all, thanks to @marypsue for listening to my ramblings and giving some feedback about this a few days ago and to @eregyrn-falls for talking about Alex’s Q&A, which reminded me to write it up and post it.

Warning: this is going to be long. Sorry.

One of the things that I’ve always hoped would get an explanation from Alex (but possibly never will?) is the meaning behind the symbol on Stan’s fez/the Cipher Wheel.

First, a bit of a tangent, but I hope a productive one: in GF fanfic, a common issue when Bill and Stan appear together in a fic is that we never canonically heard Bill’s nickname for Stan (assuming he would have given Stan one, which, given Bill’s character, seems like a safe bet). Fic authors usually get around this by having Bill call Stan “Fez,” which makes sense given that’s where his symbol is and it’s a pretty distinctive element of his appearance.


But Bill doesn’t call Dipper “ballcap,” or Mabel “sweater,” or Soos “t-shirt,” even though that’s where their symbols are found. Their nicknames are based on what the symbol IS, and the symbols (at least roughly?) represent who they are as characters.

So, ultimately, thinking about what Bill’s nickname for Stan might be sort of helps clarify what Stan’s symbol might mean vis-à-vis his character. Ahem. Back to the symbol.

The clearest direct mention of the symbol is in Journal 3, when Ford writes that Stan’s fez is from Filbrick’s  membership in the “Royal Order of the Holy Mackerel.” It’s totally possible this is all there is to it, it’s a funny fish symbol. Alex’s old DeviantArt account is reportedly holymackerel, so it’s possible it’s just something he thought was funny and that’s that.

But, we all know how much Alex loves to misdirect people – almost as much as he likes to have multiple layers of mysteries and meaning in GF. So I think it’s more likely this is just a superficial meaning for Stan’s symbol.

Looking at the symbol, there could be a few different interpretations, so I’ll present the three most interesting ones I came up with, in order of what I think is the likelihood it’s the real meaning of the symbol.

First, another look at the symbol as it appears on the fez:

Now what if we do this:

 Looks like an eye, right? Just one eye?

The least likely theory is that the symbol has something to do with Stan’s character being connected to Bill’s in some way. It’s a cool interpretation, considering how important the idea of the “beast with just one eye” was, and the fact that, as Mr. Mystery, Stan wore an eyepatch (and so had just one eye visible). If you’re a subscriber to the Same Coin theory, this interpretation might work for that.

I personally don’t think this is it, though. So let’s turn the symbol this way:

Notice the symbol in canon art is always represented with these proportions. Now what does it look like? A bit like the portal casting a shadow? Who lived (figuratively and literally) in the shadow of the portal for 30 years? Yeah.

Stan, with his long-standing self-esteem and self-worth issues, saw himself as just “part of a dynamic duo,” essentially Ford’s shadow, not capable of accomplishing anything on his own. So, this interpretation is a little more likely to me, and I headcanon that Bill’s nickname for Stan would be something like “Shadow,” because it’s not only thematically appropriate, it’s snide and hurtful.

But this still doesn’t seem like it’d be an appropriate symbol for Stan’s character. After all, reductively thinking of him as Ford’s shadow would only represent most people’s (and his own self-) perception of Stan in the first (admittedly long) part of his character arc. So what represents the culmination of his character arc?

Let’s turn the symbol one more time:

Look familiar?

Well, first of all, there are some similar-looking symbols in the history museum in SotBE:

And on the ur-Cipher Wheel in Mabelcorn:

I personally don’t think it’s related to the symbol that’s similar to the Freemason symbol, because that seems on-the-nose and superficial to be on a secret society fez (though a cute reference), and more related to Dipper’s character than Stan’s. I think the other symbol gives a clue as to its meaning, since it’s also incredibly similar to Stan’s symbol’s shape.

…what legendary bird is often represented in this shape? And the shape on the fez? Wings upraised in a circular shape?

So…my best guess is that this is a simplified, stylized version of one of the best symbols for Stan’s character: a phoenix. The imagery of Stan burning is present throughout the series, and of course, Stan is literally immolated and reborn in the finale. I absolutely headcanon that this is what Stan’s symbol really means. (But I don’t think Bill would ever call Stan “Phoenix,” do you?)

All this is just speculation, though. You’d have to have actually been in the writer’s room (or Alex’s brain), or have done a lot of research into ancient symbols (in so many cultures and historical contexts, seriously – Egyptian symbolism, indigenous American tribal symbolism, secret society symbolism, alchemy symbols, etc) to suss out what everything related to Stan and his symbol (the flag/banners for the Royal Order of the Holy Mackerel, the first symbol in comparison to the second symbol – both work for the Phoenix symbolism, the color symbolism in the series, etc) might mean.

David had just given our daughter medication to help her deal with a cold, and, quite abruptly, she announced that he was “more like the mom” and I was “the dad.” Wait, what? How can our kids (of all people!) be hypnotized by the rigid gender dichotomy that our family undermines by our very existence?

It’s not even as though we follow roles that break down in quite the way of “traditional” mom/dad couples. My job’s hours are pretty flexible, so I have lots of time to spend with the family. I do my share of the laundry and generally clean up after dinner. David does the cooking. And when it comes to caring for them when they’re sick—which, after all, triggered the mom/dad comment—it’s a pretty even deal. 

I admit the home workload isn’t strictly a 50/50 proposition. David’s design business is part-time at this point, and he does more around the house than I do. But our roles are flexible and nongendered enough that calling us Mom and Dad is just weird.

It’s also true that our neighborhood is very gender-progressive. Our next door neighbors both work full-time, but the dad’s home a lot more, does more than half the cooking, and is forever busy around the house. On the next block is a dad who mainly works from home while mom goes off to her full-time engineering job. Another mom is a high-level nurse practitioner whose husband is an ice sculptor. And so on. In sum, there is no shortage of gender-role busting all around us. Why isn’t all that enough to steer our kids away from such reductive ways of thinking?

Because even those important, living examples of role flexibility are still overwhelmed by the morass of gender traditionalism swirling around them.

Sherrie Levine
Four Woodcuts

The twelve-color woodblock prints in the portfolio Meltdown have been created by Sherrie Levine by entering images, after Duchamp, Monet, Kirchner, and Mondrian into a computer scanner that spatially quantizes and transforms these images into the minimum number of pixels, thus determining each of the colors in the four prints.

So often when we talk about Asians in media, people expect Asian-Americans to be placated by Asian content. They don’t distinguish between Asian and Asian-American content — they’re very different, and that’s not to place a higher value on one or the other. It’s just to give an awareness to people that to lump us together as the same story is reductive to our experience. The fortitude it took to come here as an immigrant, with no support system in a new place, sometimes not even speaking the language, and what it must take to have the courage to build that kind of a story and home from scratch — it is a different experience. When Hollywood executives think Asian-Americans are placated by simply Asian roles, I think that’s reductive to what it means for our immigrant experience and how unique and special that is to us. Asians and Asian-Americans — not better nor worse — just different.” [x]

anonymous asked:

you do realize that people in asia do the same thing with english, right? go into any clothing store in japan and you're guaranteed to see at least 5 different shirts/accessories with english on it.

Like, I’m totally open minded to the idea that this could be wrong, but it’s always confused me. Why is it bad for us to have Japanese things written on our clothes, but then you see other countries having English on them we don’t get offended, even though they’re doing if for the aesthetic of it too. Idk it’s always confused me, and made me feel bad for thinking that, why is it wrong?

i don’t have the energy to fully articulate an argument about language being linked to colonialism and the hegemony of english as a language being imposed not just on the west but also on eastern cultures and peoples. the very very short answer i can give you is that english has become a default lingua franca throughout much of the world. the domination of english as a language of exchange means that whether they want to or not, a lot of japanese people are forced to learn english. no white person in an english-speaking country is really ever “forced” to learn japanese. a lot of japanese people buying clothes with english text probably understand the words and can actually read the language. dan and phil don’t understand japanese and can’t read it and neither can probably the wide majority of their audience. that means they are utilizing this text for the appearance of it which means they are reducing down a language to its visual appeal or its contribution to their sense of “aesthetic.” their only basic exposure to japanese language and culture is through their avid consumption of anime and one week-long trip to the country where they mostly visited popular tourist destinations, which in itself shows that their understanding of this country, its vast history, and its culture is almost certainly limited to one sector of its entertainment media which, crucially, a lot of actual japanese people don’t even enjoy or watch. it’s just frustrating to see two white men profit off of their fixation on cultural stereotypes and, importantly, perpetuate those stereotypes and reductive thinking amongst their primarily young and largely western audience. on the flip side–japanese people putting english text on their clothing doesn’t really constitute an oversimplification or erasure of an entire language or culture because english is already the world’s dominant language and it’s not tied to a specific country or people. 

In other news, "Friend-zone" is still complete bullshit.

Saw this today. Don’t remember the exact wording, but the gist was this:

‘Don’t let her use you for deep and satisfying conversation while she’s fucking some guy who barely texts her. Know your worth.’

The following commentary is what I’d call cis-heteronormative, and even a bit lazy. I’m just frustrated and have to get this out.

If the conversation is satisfying, why are you worried about who she’s fucking? Are you a reductive asshole who thinks conversation is just the key to her pants? Is that the ultimate endgame for every relationship with a woman who isn’t your mother or sister? Are you also similarly usurious of your relationships with men, using friendship as means to selfish end?

Once again for the guys up in the nosebleed seats who maybe still haven’t heard:

“Friend-zone” is bullshit. If “knowing your worth” hinges on whether or not she thinks you’re more fuckable than some other dude, you probably don’t know your worth, and definitely don’t know hers.

In case it got past you, you are allowed to have deep, satisfying conversations with friends while dating other people. She can do that. So can you.

And for anybody on the other side of this (i.e. facing direct criticism from somebody you thought was a friend but who’s mad that they’ve been so nice to you and you give it up to some asshole because that’s your goddamn decision to make):

You probably already know this, but there’s nothing wrong with you or your decision. The problem lies *entirely* with your “friend’s” insecurity and extremely limiting priorities. That person is not ready to be your friend.

It’s entirely up to you to decide whether you have the patience to wait for them to get their shit aligned and catch up with you.

Apologies for the cis-hetero-mono-normativity.

Rant complete. You know, for the moment.


anonymous asked:

I know this may be a sensitive issue, but what do you think about the people who have to quit being vegan after developing health issues that they've tried and failed to fix by eating more vegetables?

It is a tricky subject but in all honesty I think any reduction in animal products is positive so if someone gave it a go (eating a balanced healthy vegan diet) and it just doesn’t work for them who am I to judge.
While I believe that the majority of people can live a healthy life eating a vegan diet they will always be exceptions to prove the rule.
I will applaud anyone for making positive changes be it for ethical or health reasons and think it can sometimes be off putting when people are shamed for “failing”.
Having said that I also cannot stand people that perpetuate the myth that a vegan diet is unhealthy and we all need animal products to live haha 🤔

anonymous asked:

hey so i was wondering if you had any advice. i'm a fssw on the east coast and i really struggle with loneliness and isolation, even though i work in a city and know other sw's and do harm reduction work. i think its because i'm a lesbian and i want a girlfriend, but the logistics of work makes it hard to date and i just can't imagine any dyke wanting to date a women who fucks men for a living, like even sw friendly lbtg ppl i know really only support it in theory, but when it comes down (1/2)

oh bud this one is hard! those people are out there but it takes a lot of sifting depending on where you are and what your immediate friends group is like. there are ABSOLUTELY lesbians who are okay with dating swers and who get that it’s work but there are JUST as many shitheads as there are in str9 circles.

it can be really lonely and isolating because no one else really understands except other sex workers. but ime the best partners come when you aren’t looking for anyone, which is NOT comforting I know. but there are good lesbians out there! it’s not hopeless. it’s just time consuming and exhausting.

If you’re asking the son of an unemployed West Virginia coal miner to check his privilege, or appreciate the ways Barack Obama’s daughters might be underprivileged to him in certain ways, I think you’re asking too much of basic human cognition. That kid can’t look at his life and say about a group of people he doesn’t understand or interact with day to day that their lives are much worse than his. That’s one of the things that the modern discourse on racial privilege and racial disadvantage misses out. Even though I don’t think the people making these arguments are that reductive, I think that they are a lot more sophisticated in what they’re saying about how privilege operates in our society. The way that it is actually talked about appears very reductive and that’s a very significant problem.
—  JD Vance, Hillbilly Elegy
Relaxation Cassette #1

[Transcriber’s note: Ads, credits, and announcements are transcribed at @withinthecredits]

Welcome to the relaxation study. This ten-cassette series will guide you towards relaxation, focus, and total body awareness. Listen to these guides with authorized headphones provided to you by the Institute’s security team.

These cassettes will help to further understand how your body works from top down, mind to matter. My voice will guide you through these exercises. You will trust only my voice, and your body, to which you are servant.

Listen. Remember. Comprehend.

If you listen carefully to each recorded session, you may find information in these cassettes useful to you in your daily life. The object is to listen, to remember, and to comprehend.

Before you start the study, find a private spot, alone, away from your unit mates and security nurse, far from disruptive sounds such as telephone booths and redress sirens. These cassettes are to be listened to free of external interference.

Cassette 1: Reducing Stress. Side A: Weight of the World.

Keep reading


The actresses I’ve known support each other very much. We all have different things to offer. It can be frustrating when you’re put in a category with others. Women do get lumped together in this reductive grouping, and you think, ‘Gosh, that rarely happens with the boys.’ I’m sure people don’t say to Eddie Redmayne, ‘How do you feel about Andrew Garfield?’“

No but let’s talk about this idea that the core of Tyrion’s storyline is about realizing that good can only be accomplished by defecting to Daenerys.

I think this is a misreading of the text and I’ve already said that I think it’s a misreading to read Tyrion as someone who is on the wrong side because he thinks it’s the right thing to do, because the reason he’s there is because he thinks it’s the only thing to do. I think GRRM’s books are often about depicting loyalty to family, which is amped up to 11 in a feudal setting, but Tyrion’s loyalty to his family is also not only practical in a world where he would be dead otherwise, but a psychological dependence born out of being disabled and being abused for years.

And I think it’s wrong to say that good can only be accomplished through revolutionizing the system when you’re talking about oppressed people who are simultaneously abused by and dependent upon that system. And I think it’s reductive to condemn fans for praising Tyrion for his good actions which occur even as he is a part of that oppressive regime because these are actually the things he is remembered for not only by fans but by the characters themselves. Jon, Bran, and Sansa all remember Tyrion not as their enemy but as someone who was kind to them, and like Tyrion, they are also trapped by an oppressive system. If you want to condemn fans for seeing Tyrion this way then you also have to realize that this is the way the text is written and many of our characters who are unambiguously heroic POV characters also see Tyrion this way. I would argue that this is actually the point GRRM is making so it’s not wrong for fans to praise Tyrion for being able to do good even while subject to an oppressive regime, and in fact that the point is that good comes from the acts Tyrion does that are outside of that regime while still working within it, like helping Sansa despite the regime telling him that he must also abuse her.

And the idea that Tyrion is supposed to be becoming a better person by defecting to Daenerys is also, I think, deconstructed by the text because Tyrion’s motivations for going to Daenerys are not for the greater good. His primary motive is revenge, but he also is going to Daenerys in ADWD because once again he is a position where he doesn’t really have another choice.

His journey towards Daenerys is largely one he is pushed into by other people. He isn’t given a choice about going to Essos in the first place, and his journey across the sea is a claustrophobic one in a small cabin aboard a ship out in the middle of the ocean - emphasizing the idea that there is no other choice - going somewhere completely unknown to Tyrion, who is also trapped by his own trauma and depression.

He is first given the idea of joining Daenerys by Illyrio, whose manse is a high-walled cage for Tyrion.

Across the pool stood a brick wall twelve feet high, with iron spikes along its top. Beyond that was the city. A sea of tiled rooftops crowded close around a bay. He saw square brick towers, a great red temple, a distant manse upon a hill. In the far distance, sunlight shimmered off deep water. Fishing boats were moving across the bay, their sails rippling in the wind, and he could see the masts of larger ships poking up along the shore. Surely one is bound for Dorne, or for Eastwatch-by-the-Sea. He had no means to pay for passage, though, nor was he made to pull an oar.


With a rope and a grapnel he might be able to get over that wall. He had strong arms and he did not weigh much. He should be able to clamber over, if he did not impale himself on a spike. I will search for a rope on the morrow, he resolved.  

Tyrion expresses a desire to leave Illyrio’s manse but this desire is never realized, largely because he has no where to go and no means of accomplishing anything. He’s also too traumatized and depressed to motivate himself to do anything about his position, underscored by the fact that he has no place in society to go back to if he were to flee Illyrio and his plans.

“You mistake me,” Tyrion said again, more loudly. The buttered mushrooms glistened in the lamplight, dark and inviting. “I have no wish to die, I promise you. I have …” His voice trailed off into uncertainty. What do I have? A life to live? Work to do? Children to raise, lands to rule, a woman to love?  

“You have nothing,” finished Magister Illyrio, “but we can change that.”

The choice here is stark: go with Illyrio or die. The sense that Tyrion is trapped by his current position is also underlined by the journey in palanquin that he takes with Illyrio, literally being carried along in a small space closed off from the rest of the world, in which there is nothing to do but drink and mull over his own tormented thoughts.

Next is Tyrion’s journey on the Shy Maid. Again Tyrion is not master of his own decisions but becomes a member of Griff’s crew, told that he is “the least of their company”, an idea underscored by Tyrion being forced to wear motley, a reminder of his social position as dwarf. Tyrion isn’t even free to choose the clothes on his back, going from ill-fitting boy’s clothes - clothing not meant to fit his disabled body - to motley to jester’s uniform to the yellow tunic he will wear when he is literally made a slave.

Tyrion makes his own detour on his joureny by going to a brothel in Selhorys. There he is kidnapped by Jorah, who will forcibly take him to Daenerys in chains. When Tyrion and Jorah meet Penny, Tyrion has no choice but to participate in the dwarf joust to save his and Penny’s lives, a degrading task that further underscores the lack of choices allowed for people like him. When he is later enslaved, his lack of choices is even more clear. He does make a choice to free himself and Penny and Jorah from slavery, motivated by the desperateness of the situation.

The point I’m making is that Tyrion’s core storyline in the books has a lot to do with trying to work with the choices you have. Tyrion doesn’t have a lot of choice about working with the Lannisters and when he does leave the Lannisters he doesn’t have a lot of choices, either. Whether he makes the choice on his own to work with Daenerys for the greater good is yet to be seen, but I don’t think you can look at Tyrion’s storyline or the choices he makes without taking into account the limitations caused by the way he is viewed by society because of his disability and his psychological reliance on a system that abuses him. Even when he is free from that system to a degree, he still is not free to make choices that are uninfluenced by it.


If you think you remember “Gigi” well, a newly buffed revival wants you to have some freshened perspective on the Oscar-winning 1958 film musical, later turned into a stage version by its creators, the “My Fair Lady” team of Alan Jay Lerner and Frederick Loewe.

Oh, Paris remains glisteningly romantic at the Kennedy Center, in director Eric Schaeffer’s luxe, $12 million production, and the effervescent score still radiates Gallic charm. Other things have, well, evolved in the Paris of 1900, as adapted from Colette’s novella. Gigi, in the guise of “High School Musical” star Vanessa Hudgens, has more backbone, and a sharpened awareness of the limits imposed on women of the period. And some of what might be looked at askance by modern audiences, such as the aging roué’s delivery of “Thank Heaven for Little Girls,” has been reconsidered. Now it’s an older generation of women singing appreciatively about how “little girls get bigger every day.”

All in all, this Broadway-bound revival, with a majorly tweaked new book by British playwright Heidi Thomas, is well thought out and well handled, especially courtesy of a runway’s worth of sumptuous evening gowns by Catherine Zuber, and the elegant choreography by Joshua Bergasse. But the production, which had its official opening Thursday night, is also a reminder that “Gigi” is not a great musical, nothing really special. It’s forever very okay — no matter how much the song assignments and gender politics are fiddled with. Its status as a lesser “My Fair Lady” has been remarked on, accurately, many times before.

For me, the love story at its core, between the gamine Gigi (now 18 rather than 16) and the musical’s younger rake Gaston (originally in his mid-30s and now in Corey Cott’s personification in his mid-20s) lacks the dynamism required for an evening’s full propulsion. The plot essentially revolves around Gaston’s very slow realization that his feelings for the blossoming Gigi run deep and, under her beguiling, unwitting tutelage, sees her ultimately not as a prize but as a partner. Neither original book writer Lerner nor adapter Thomas finds a satisfying way of making this feel like an epic match; the musical relies too much on our reflexive wish for a happy ending and too little on why our hope should be that Gigi ends up with this rich guy.

Hudgens has the unenviable task of competing with a specific memory, that of Leslie Caron’s uncanny film performance, a key to the film’s luster, along with Maurice Chevalier’s turn, brimming with eternal sunshine, as aging bon vivant Honore. (Howard McGillin plays him here, to cozy rather than incandescent effect.) Hudgens brandishes only one tool, an unsuppressed giggle, for most of Act 1; cuteness, alas, is pretty much all the first 75 minutes of the show ask of her. She’s much more convincing in the altogether stronger Act 2, after her rather abrupt transformation from child into woman. Here Zuber dresses her the way Cecil Beaton would Audrey Hepburn, in shimmering white with black finishes, and she’s permitted to show some becoming spark.

Her voice is sweet and light, though a little over-enunciated, and a counterpoint to Cott’s clarion vibrato. Her best song is a quiet one, “The Letter,” one of the half-dozen numbers Lerner and Loewe added after the movie musical, when they tried to turn it into a stage show. She and the solid Cott do nicely, too, by their added duet, “In This Wide, Wide World.”

The vocal honors, however, go to the excellent Victoria Clark, playing Gigi’s grandmother and caretaker, Mamita, a role that is more crucially entwined in the evening’s signature melodies. Mamita and Honore still banter their way through the wry “I Remember It Well,” but it’s now Mamita and her sister, Alicia (terrific Dee Hoty), a materially comforted courtesan in her dotage, who sing “Thank Heaven for Little Girls.” This is one of the concessions to a belief that there’s more than a whiff of the seamy, or worse, in a musical that depicts a young girl being readied for market, if you will, as a kept consort to a wealthy man.

Come to think of it, why are so many well-known Golden Age musicals — “Gigi,” “Gypsy,” “My Fair Lady” — concerned with “remaking” impressionable young women so that they’re more appealing to men? It’s a reductive way of thinking about these admired shows, I’ll admit. Still, I also have to confess that as with “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum,” I’m especially curious how my 20-something daughter would react to this one.

Thomas, creator of the BBC series “Call the Midwife,” has made useful adjustments to plot and character to try to round out “Gigi.” A crucial one occurs in Act 2, after the scene in which Gaston takes resplendent Gigi to the hot spot Maxim’s. Gigi’s determination to be her own person is newly underlined; it’s she, not Gaston, who now sets the rules for their ever-after. “I could never be happy if I couldn’t be myself,” she declares. The three principal female characters now exist on a continuum of enlightenment: on the extremes, Alicia is a total throwback, and Gigi a harbinger of a new level of understanding of a woman’s sense of self. In the middle is Mamita, uncomfortable with Alicia’s old prescriptions but anxious about how Gigi will otherwise be able to make her way in the world.

Some of the show’s other songs have been assigned to new characters: Mamita, for instance, now sings “Say a Prayer,” sung by Gigi in the film as “Say a Prayer for Me Tonight.” A less successful alteration has been made to the lovely “I’m Glad I’m Not Young Anymore,” performed as a solo by Chevalier to bittersweet perfection. Here, it’s turned into a broader, comic duet for McGillin and Clark, and it’s all wrong in conception and movement — it comes across as an unintended knockoff of Harvey Fierstein and Dick Latessa dancing “Timeless to Me” in “Hairspray.”

The visual splendor of director Vincente Minnelli’s movie is ably reflected in set designer Derek McLane’s glorious iron-lattice architectural exteriors and warmly draped interiors. And Loewe’s melodies swell grandly under the music direction of James Moore and a 13-member orchestra.

Schaeffer’s vision here is a suitably warm one, too. I suspect that fans of the movie will again find moments to ooh and aah, even if “Gigi” will make only the exceptionally devoted go “ooh la la.”

anonymous asked:

Don't be reductive. Yes, many pregnancy centers have been caught lying or hiding their MO. But there are also ones that are above-board, honest with the info they provide, and helpful. There's a busy one in my 'hood in a major pro-choice NE city that has helped many women & families who don't want an abortion but lack the resources to carry a pregnancy to term or raise a baby. They provide adoption help and hook hard-up parents up with practical resources and classes. Some really do good work.

External image

OH YOU RIGHT what the Bad Advisor definitely wants to do is to send a scared 15-year-old into a crisis pregnancy center that may or may not be a hellden of anti-science bullshit, rather than recommending they visit an actual medical establishment, accountable to actual institutional oversight, from which they can receive unbiased counseling.

The Bad Advisor just could not be more sorry that she may have offended some fuckers who are likely to make their clients go to bible study before they “earn” a fucking pack of diapers, or who actively deceive clients about the gestational age of a fetus in hopes of forcing them past the legal abortion deadline in their state. Please forgive the Bad Advisor for being so … reductive.