oh god ed reddit is having the “uwu anorexia isn’t rooted in fatphobia my mental illness is not abt you” talk again please god help me
fatphobia doesn’t mean “being a meanie to fat ppl” i’m begging you to use critical thinking skills for five seconds and apply what you know about literally any other form of oppression to this situation.
people’s point isn’t that you having anorexia makes them feel bad and therefore you’re a bad fatphobic person.
they’re pointing out how the deeply ingrained fatphobia our society upholds, from misconceptions about health to moralization of looks and weight, including yes being jerks to fat ppl’s faces bc they’re fat, is affecting what you think about your own looks, weight, health, body, clothes, eating habits, etc.
the logic isn’t “you became anorexic because you hate fat people so much you never wanted to be fat yourself (and that makes you a bad person)” it’s “fatphobia is a prism that transforms the root cause of your ed into disordered thoughts, behaviors, and patterns (and unlearning fatphobia will help you with recovery and harm-reduction)”
like. it’s not for no reason that anorexia is a disorder that disproportionatedly affects women. it’s not for no reason that there’s sky high comorbidity rates for eds and ocd. it’s not for no reason that people who need control in their lives so badly that they develop a mental disorder abt it get obssessed with being skinny and not with being a sumo. it’s not for no reason that ppl who feel the need to retract to childhood due to trauma envy things like being skinny light and frail, instead of being a tubby baby. it’s not for no reason that there is an incredibly common anorexic thought pattern (internal and self-directed, don’t make me say what i didn’t say) that associaties restriction and weight loss with moral goodness.
for each of these there IS a number of exceptions, but you can see case by case how the root cause (trauma, need for control, for self-destruction, growing up poor, whatever you think is “unrelated to fatphobia” basically) is processed through the prism of the fatphobic culture we’ve all been raised in. some people just, voluntarily or not, deal with those root causes in different way, which might or might not be healthy. but it’s a consequence of ambiant fatphobia that “i should starve and be skinny about it” is a statistically pretty common response to this distress.
the point isn’t “it’s fatphobic that you don’t deal with your neuroses in a body positive way uwu” the point is that no matter how cool you are with fat people on like, a personal level, you’ve been (like the rest of us) bombarded with fatphobic thought patterns your entire life basically, both directly fatphobic things and reactions to this fatphobia. maybe spoken to you directly, maybe not. maybe about you maybe about other people. you live in a society that places moral values into looks and health, and also pushes some deeply rooted falsehoods about how those things tie into each other. you have a disorder defined by obsessive behaviors. maybe, just maybe, deconstructing the logic that those obsessives behaviors are based upon will help you deal with this disorder. and recover or reduce harm.
basically, anorexia isn’t “getting skinny disorder” it’s “obsession disorder”, obsession with looking attractive, or pleasing your family, or going back to being a kid, or being healthy, or being fit, or being driven and capable, or being worth saving, or having your suffering known, or having control over something, or whatever. the fatphobia that is omnipresent (and i repeat, omnipresent, nobody is singling you out as a bad fatphobic meanie, or even talking about your behavior towards other people around you) in our society picks the direction in which many many people will express that disorder.
of course if you live in a society that tells you “being fat is morally bad” at every turn, when you start developping an obssessive pathological need to control things, without another factor weighting in, most people’s default reaction will be anorexia. food is a regular fixture of everybody’s life, everyone wants to be morally good, and even if we know/understand/believe to an extent the flaws of that “fat = bad” logic we know the world around us still believes it, and nobody wants to be treated like shit. we can think it’s stupid and fight against fatphobia and work to treat fat ppl better in our lives and support body positivity, but in any case, one always judges oneself on different metrics than they judge others, cuz we control our self-improvement. that’s natural. just it doesn’t mesh well with a pathologically obssessive need for control above self-preservation.
104 notes
·
View notes
me: so you see, Brennan, it's explicit in the rules that the ability to take a bonus action depends on the ability to take an action. that's why effects or conditions that prevent you from taking an action never specify that you can't take a bonus action either – it's implicitly clear that you can't, they didn't just forget to include it and you don't need to let people take bonus actions in these cases
dimension 20 staff member: ma'am you simply have to leave. how did you even get on the set
29 notes
·
View notes
Okay, wait lmao. I got to chap 45 and was surprised too see what I think is That Betrayal that I see some people get so so hung up about. Is this it? in Chapter 45? Chapter 45?? out of 128?? Like the way I saw some ppl cite it as a "I like yanshen except-" or like this is an unforgiveable thing by YWS.... and it's like. idk man, we're not even at the halfway mark yet. YWS is still like in his enacting his theorem on the world to try to get SQ to see it as a proof of concept stage. It also didn't really feel like it came out of nowhere at least not for me lmao, I was like, yeah this makes sense as a next step, like. whatever YWS does has to be an escalation and it has to come from him, and it has to be something that WOULD be personal like this. Especially after SQ called him his friend (even if part of the excuse was that it's easier to explain and etc)
8 notes
·
View notes
it's fun to look through datamined stuff but I need some of you to stop getting mad at larian for scrapping ideas you thought were cool. cool doesn't mean it'll make sense in the overarching story, and maybe larian likes this version better, or sometimes ideas just didn't work well with what they had in mind. I know this first hand from writing stories, I'll have cool ideas but realize later it doesn't fit the original tone of the story. it's okay to scrap stuff, but you can always use it for something else.
also, like it or not, it's larians game first, their story, their characters (I know.), it doesn't matter if we think something is cool, the reality is that not everything works in the end. and that's fine. that's how all art is, it's alive and ever-shifting, it'll go through many, many, versions, to the point where you might get sick of chewing on the same plot, and in the end the final version might not be as good as you thought when you look back in a few months or years. and that's ok. art isn't supposed to be perfect.
everything is subjective and I think fandoms would be a more intellectual place if people learned to critique art for what it is not what it isn't.
3 notes
·
View notes
About the ending of The Troubadours of Roc-a-Pic...
I know Maximin's dad wanted to give him a reward for resisting his anger and Guillemette a reward for saving his ass, but after reading this one again for the first time since high school, I initially refused to believe that they just got married right then and there. They hardly interacted afaik. Idk it just seems kinda rushed at the time.
But eh, arranged marriages weren't unheard of in the middle ages anyway. Even if neither of them like each other in that way, at least they'll have heirs. I'm betting they were both like "Aw nice, I get to live with my best friend!"
Can't really see the marriage being very romantically fulfilling for them tho unless one or both of them are somewhere on the ace spectrum. But I guess after thinking about it, I can kinda see how it would be likely to happen considering the time period. Duke gets his heir back, and now there will be ANOTHER future heir to the dukedom. Guess it's a win win as far as inheritance is concerned ig. :/
10 notes
·
View notes
i guess the reason so many books featuring trans characters have them able to go stealth and make it so other characters don't know they're trans unless they say something is because that's an escapist fantasy for many trans authors who don't get that and want to imagine what it's like to live in a world where you don't get misgendered on sight every single day, and because they don't want to write about the latter (very fair)
but also when these are YA books it depends on the characters being able to medically transition at like 14 and i have literally never in my life met a single person who was able to do that (partly because I live in the UK where you can't and also I am old enough that for people my age, coming out as a preteen would've been way harder and rarer than it would be for current teen-aged protagonists)
so idk. i would like to read a book with trans characters who feel like real people living in the real world occasionally. it's hard to walk a path when you never get to see other people do it first and never get to witness it safely in fiction before you experience it IRL, and only ever seeing people walk roads that don't even exist in your reality doesn't really help at all tbh
31 notes
·
View notes
terfs when a study shows literally anything positive about trans people/transitioning: 'hm i think this requires some fact-checking. Were those researchers REALLY unbiased? Because if they were biased this doesn't count and if they weren't knowingly biased they probably were unconsciously biased, woke media affects so much these days. Have there been any other studies on this? Because if there haven't been this could be an outlier and if there have been and they all agree that's a bit odd, why aren't there any outliers, and if there have been and any disagree we really won't know the truth until we very thoroughly analyze them all, will we? Were there enough subjects for a good sample size? Did every single subject involved stay involved through the whole study because if they didn't we should be sure nothing shady was going on resulting in people dropping out. Are we 110% sure all the subjects were fully honest and at no point were embarrassed or afraid to admit they didn't love transitioning to the people in charge of their transition? Are we 110% sure none of the subjects were manipulated into thinking they were happy with their transition? In fact we should double-check what they think with their parents, because if the subjects and their parents disagree it's probably because they've been manipulated but their cis parents have not and are very unbiased. How many autistic subjects were there because if there weren't enough then this doesn't really study the overlap between autistic and trans and if there were too many then we just don't know enough about what causes that overlap to be sure this study really explains being trans and isn't just about being autistic. How many AFAB subjects were there because if there weren't enough this is just another example of prioritizing AMAB people and ignoring the different struggles of girls and women and if there were too many how do we know sexism didn't affect the results. Was the study double-blinded? We all know double-blinded is the most reliable so if this one wasn't that's a point against it even if the thesis literally physically could not be double-blinded. Look i'm not being transphobic, i want what's best for trans people! Really! But as a person who is not trans and therefore objective in a way they cannot possibly be, i just think we should only take into account Good Science here. You want to be following science and not being manipulated or experimented upon by something unscientific, right?'
terfs when they see a study of 45 subjects so old it predates modern criteria for gender dysphoria and basically uses 'idk her parents think she's too butch', run by a guy who practiced conversion therapy, 'confirmed' by a guy who treated the significant portion of subjects who didn't follow up as all desisting, definitely in the category of 'physically cannot double-blind this', completely contradicted by multiple other studies done on actual transgender subjects, but can be kinda cited as evidence against transitioning if you ignore everything else about it: 'oOOH SEE THIS IS WHAT WE'RE TALKIN BOUT. SCIENCE. Just good ol' unbiased thorough analysis. I see absolutely no reason to dig any deeper on this and if you think it's wrong you're the one being unscientific. It's really a shame you've been so thoroughly brainwashed by the trans agenda and can't even accept science when you see it. Maybe now that someone has finally uncovered this long-lost study from 1985, we can make some actual progress on the whole trans problem.'
5 notes
·
View notes