Alright, so this is a reply to @my-jokes-are-my-armour brilliant additions to my post, because the original one was getting insanely long, and apparently I had lots of feels about this, but asfoljasdfklsf;asldkfas;flkjasdlkjffslksjdf;s...
That "maybe"...
There are so many possible "layers" to that "maybe"!
And that's definitely one the places where Jaskier and Radovid's respective situations massively differ in that scene, too, IMHO.
Like you've said, Jaskier has a found family that he's spent about 20+ years investing in.
So, obviously, it would make absolutely no sense for him to sacrifice the ties he's already built with Geralt, Yennefer, and Ciri, for a relationship that does have great potential, but is still in its infancy; whereas Radovid has made no such personal commitments in his life.
I don't know if you're familiar with the YouTube channel "Cinema Therapy" (basically, a psychologist and filmmaker analysing various movie relationships, characters psychology, etc. I highly recommend it!), but they've occasionally spoken about the notion of "shelving your agenda".
Essentially, "shelving your agenda" relates to a person's ability to "temporarily delay one's own needs to meet those of another".
And, in this particular situation, the only one of them that can afford to shelve his own agenda for the other is Radovid.
Because, at that moment, Jaskier is facing the possibility of devastating potential losses within his family system that greatly threaten his emotional and psychological well-being.
Radovid can (or at least could, while Vizimir was the one still wearing that crown) afford to be the one providing him with emotional, physical and financial support to give Jaskier his best chance at being reunited with those he loves.
But Jaskier can't really promise or offer Radovid anything in return for the time being.
And sadly, he doesn't know how bad things are for Radovid at court, either.
He doesn't know that Philippa and Dijkstra orchestrated Queen Hedwig's murder, right under King Vizimir's nose, with such confidence in their ability to get away with it that they openly told the Crown Prince of Redania about it!
He doesn't know about Radovid's relationship dynamic with his brother, and the fact that being the King's little brother is no longer enough to keep Radovid safe in that castle.
And I don't think Jaskier fully grasps just how much being in his presence is already offering Radovid something that's rather essential for his own emotional and psychological well-being, too, that he has never been able to find anywhere else.
Jaskier: "You don't understand. [This is not me trying to walk away from a relationship with you.] The war brewing outside is nothing compared to what Geralt will unleash on this Continent to find his daughter. [I'm pretty much planning to go throw myself headfirst into some desperate suicide mission with a stubborn, insanely protective Witcher dad!] I don't know what happens next. [I've no idea what will happen to me. Out there, none of us will be safe!]"
Radovid: [Oh boy! Where do I even start?] "Just let me be there with you." [Trust me, as terrible as you are trying to make it sound, joining you on a suicide mission following an angry overprotective Witcher around is actually my safest, least bad option.] "Prove that I'm more than a mask." [I belong with you and your family out there, not stuck at court playing games!]
Basically, I've a feeling that Jaskier might be operating under the belief that the safest place for the Crown Prince of Redania to be, in times of war with Nilfgaard, is behind the well guarded walls of a castle; not running around the Continent helping him and Geralt go rescue a Princess!
If he returns to Tretogor and stay there, Radovid will have an entire army standing between him and Nilfgaard!
Which, you know, is pretty much the reason that had convinced him that Ciri might be better off in Redania rather than anywhere else...
If he comes with him, well, Radovid is probably one of the last people you'd want anyone loyal to Nilfgaard to get their hands on.
The King's brother - and sole current living heir to the throne (at the time) - is very much someone that Redania's enemies would want to capture so they can use as leverage against the King.
And Jaskier's pretty much planning on being Geralt's ride or die companion on his quest to find Ciri.
So, I'm not sure how comfortable Jaskier is with the possibility of Radovid getting himself captured by enemies or killed trying to help them out there; or, even worse, winding up sacrificing his life to save Jaskier's.
Because Radovid has already proven that he values Jaskier's safety and freedom above his own, when he ditched his whole (now very dead) royal security detail to go see him and Ciri at the cabin.
Radovid is willing to make Jaskier his #1 priority, in a situation where Jaskier needs to make Geralt, Yennefer and Ciri his own #1 priority.
Jaskier is planning to "shelve his agenda" for his family, to the point of being willing to risk sacrificing his life for them…
…while Radovid is talking about "shelving his agenda" for Jaskier, while being willing to risk sacrificing his life for him, and - by extension - Jaskier's family, too.
It's likely a lot for Jaskier to take in.
And, perhaps, knowing that Radovid - at least - would be safe back in his castle, would give Jaskier some peace of mind, and even something for him to fight to come back to, should he somehow succeed in helping Geralt get Ciri back without managing to get himself killed in the process!
So, Jaskier's "maybe" is likely the most sincere answer Jaskier can give him at the moment, since Jaskier genuinely doesn't know what happens next, and he probably doesn't want Radovid to make the decision to take such a huge risk for himself and his family based on the promise of things that he might never be given the chance to offer him.
Had Jaskier known that the greatest threat Radovid was facing could be found within his castle's well guarded walls, his response to Radovid's desire to be there with him might have been different.
Perhaps he might have said something along the lines of "Forget about the money, and if you really want to come with me, come with me now! We'll think of a way to let your brother know you're relatively safe, and haven't been killed or kidnapped while we're on the road!", or something.
And then, hope his own family would understand why he chose to take Radovid with him, and for them hopefully to not be upset that he's just managed to make their whole situation even more complicated than it already was.
[Poor Geralt though…
Geralt: Let me get this straight… Of all the people on the Continent you could have romantically fallen for, you somehow managed to pick the Crown Prince of Redania? And now, the prince - who comes from a bad home that has been mistreating him - has been following you outside his castle, and you're asking if we can adopt and keep him?
Jaskier: *Smiles sheepishly and attempts to look adorable.* Yes?
Geralt: *Mumbling to himself.* Why does Destiny fucking hate me so much? How many princes and princesses am I supposed to be looking after? I'm a Witcher, for fuck's sake! I'm supposed to be killing monsters! Not opening a royal rescue shelter…
Radovid: *Concerned.* Ah, is your Witcher okay?
Jaskier: Just give him a moment to have a mental breakdown, and he'll be fine!]
But Jaskier doesn't know how bad things are for Radovid back at Tretogor.
Actually, even Radovid himself doesn't fully know!
As far as Radovid is concerned, Dijkstra briefly perceived him as a threat - or at least a nuisance - with regards to the complete and absolute influence he has on King Vizimir, and threatened to have him killed if he gets in their way.
So, by leaving, he'd technically be doing him a favor! No more "baby prince brother" royalsitting for Dijkstra and Philippa! They can go back to the way they've always preferred doing things, without having Radovid to deal with!
But Radovid doesn't know his brother has decided to let Philippa take the fall for Thanedd, and that the best solution the sorceress came up with, to deal with the issue, is "Yup! Imma get rid of Vizimir and put that spare on the throne!"
On a scale of 0 to "the spymasters are so confident they can get away with regicide that they feel totally comfortable making the guy they gleefully confessed Queen Hedwig's murder to King", just how fucking screwed are you?
I don't think Radovid had fully realised he'd reached that very last stage yet.
But yeah, Jaskier answering "maybe" made much more sense, to me, than him going "yes please, come with me, where I'll almost certainly manage to get you and/or myself killed in a desperate attempt to keep my family safe!"
And I love how long he hesitates before giving that answer, and the way his thoughts really appear to be racing, even after he says "maybe", because it is an incredibly complex and multi-factorial situation for him to deal with.
Whereas Radovid has essentially two choices:
Return to a loveless, toxic, dangerous place where he's totally disconnected from himself, and isolated from healthy human interactions.
Be out there in the world, risking his life for something - someone - that's worth taking those risks for, thus acting in accordance with who he is, and what matters to him the most.
So, Radovid basically saying "I'm all in! Let's go!", while Jaskier is saying "maybe", to me, might have more to do with how well they are both ready to handle and accept the potential consequences of Radovid choosing to go with Jaskier at that moment; than it has to do with how much they both desire to have the chance to potentially be together, or even Jaskier struggling with forgiving him.
Of course, there's also Jaskier's own personal fears (of abandonment, of falling back into unhealthy codependent patterns, etc.) that may play a role in him hesitating to treat his feelings for Radovid as a full-fledged partnership right away, and being comfortable with the idea of trusting Radovid enough to rely on him for support, too (trust and forgiveness are not quite the same thing).
That "maybe" is filled with so much potential delicious meanings, I'm telling you!
And, given that being told "maybe" didn't deter Radovid from wanting to go to Jaskier, I've a feeling that Radovid knew that Jaskier's "maybe" was also filled with a lot of hope and yearning, and as close to a "yes" as Jaskier could afford to offer him.
After all, he'd already told Radovid that his plans [of breaking things off between them] had changed.
When Radovid said "I don't get it", Jaskier could have answered him with: "it's the right thing to do", or "I may no longer want to see you, that doesn't mean I wish you to get hurt, Radovid", or "I owe you for having ditched - and now lost - your guards when you came to see me. This is me doing what I can do to pay back the favor."
But Jaskier said "plans change", with some of the most cautiously hopeful and vulnerable puppy dog eyes I've ever seen him throw at anyone.
To me, there was a sense of forgiveness and a bit of an apology, even, in Jaskier's expression at that moment…
Because the fact remains that Jaskier didn't offer Radovid his help, the night before, when he told him he was scared; resulting in Jaskier having allowed Radovid to back himself into that corner where people might say and do stupid things.
It would be a bit unfair for Jaskier to be upset with Radovid for not having trusted him with everything he knew when he came to see him and Ciri, when Jaskier himself was so scared to trust Radovid that he didn't call him out for having avoided to directly answer his question, and instead chose to test what he'd do with the information that the forcefield only lasted 'til dawn.
He's accusing Radovid of not fully trusting him and having kept his full intentions from him, when Jaskier himself literally set up a trap for him, because he was too scared to trust him…
And Radovid had the honesty of saying "I'm scared, Jaskier", at the very least. Whereas Jaskier kept his own fears to himself, and chose to play games and test him.
Granted, Radovid could have pretended to be scared to get Jaskier to lower his defenses, and manipulate him. I'm not saying that Jaskier didn't have very valid reasons for choosing to test him, rather than opting for a direct confrontation.
Trust eventually does become essential in a relationship, but it would be unrealistic to expect it to "magically be there" until both sides have experienced how the other responds in a variety of situations - including their ability to make each other still feel safe while they handle conflicts and mistakes.
So, I'm not pointing out Jaskier's own contribution to this whole mess while trying to determine who is to blame, who was wrong, or who hurt the other the most.
Just hoping that, maybe, Jaskier is allowing himself to recognize that they are both very flawed, complex and human individuals that never meant to hurt each other at that moment.
That part of the reasons why he sits down and looks at Radovid with such a sad, defeated expression, is that he's realizing that they were simply dealing and coping with their own respective fears and doubts as best they could back at the cabin, and got both a good, strong bite in the arse as a result!
When Radovid ran away from the cabin earlier, Jaskier made a little move as if instinctively wanting to run after him.
I think that, maybe, in all of the ways Jaskier might have expected their confrontation to go when "catching Radovid in the act" that morning, he might have imagined facing more outrage from Radovid, more fight…
He might have expected for him to start blaming him in return, etc.
Because, had Radovid indeed been a "knife" and wearing a mask with Jaskier, he might have played "meek" and attempted to "reason with" Jaskier in the beginning in a desperate last ditch attempt to hold onto his mask, sure!
But, when he'd realised it didn't work - and Jaskier would not be so easily fooled - the mask would eventually have had to come off!
Radovid could easily have pretended that he had only wanted to test if Jaskier was being sincere with him.
He could have claimed that he'd realised, the night before, that Jaskier had only let him know about when the forcefield would come down, because he'd never truly cared about him, nor trusted him!
And low and behold! He was right!
Radovid could have accused Jaskier of having been dishonest and manipulative with him, of only having ever pretended to care for him, so he could use him because of his wealth and position at court.
He could have mocked Jaskier for having claimed that "he had no desire" to be playing games with him through his song, only to then go on scheming against him, and setting up traps for him at the first opportunity he got!
A skilled "knife", caught in a lie, will not admit to any wrongdoing, and will make it sound like you're the villain, they're the victim, and the problem lies with you, not them.
But Radovid's response was being truthful in his answers, internalize Jaskier's blame, look like he'd just been kicked, utter a pitiful "I'm so sorry," and run away!
Unless you are someone that enjoy dominating other people and bringing them down (something I do not believe Jaskier does), there's no sense of triumph, or even validation to be derived from Radovid's response!
There's no sense of relief from "having escaped being fooled by such a manipulative and dangerous individual" to be found!
Radovid just took all the blame on himself, brokenly apologized for having managed to hurt and disappoint Jaskier, and ran away thinking he'd forever lost him.
Had Jaskier's priority not been to ensure Ciri's safety, I think he might have followed his impulse and gone after Radovid to attempt to get to the bottom of what was actually happening.
And, even should he have suspected that Radovid's behavior was yet another manipulation attempt - that Radovid would be patient enough to hold onto his mask a while longer while faking taking responsibility for his mistakes and hurting Jaskier…
There's absolutely no way Radovid could have predicted that Jaskier was going to come investigate the room he'd huddled himself into a dark corner to cry.
So, I like to think that Jaskier did regret his harsh words, the way he'd jumped to conclusions back at the cabin, and how he'd cut short Radovid's attempt to explain, as soon as he'd mentioned that he'd be out from under Dijkstra's thumb.
I like to think that Jaskier was sorry for the way he'd hurt Radovid, too, and that he realised that he'd let his own fears and issues get the best of him.
Now, it's up to them to decide if they'll allow their respective fears and issues to win; or instead let that deep, beautiful and delicate connection that they've been experiencing together come out on top.
So, since "the plan" was for Radovid to have seen the last of Jaskier…
I tend to interpret Jaskier saying "plans change" as a way of telling Radovid "I don't want this to be the last you see of me. If you'll still have me, when this is over, I'd like to come back to you."
With Radovid's immediate response being "Come with me, then."
Because Radovid does very much still want Jaskier.
Except Jaskier has a family he needs to go help first, before he can be free to go back to Radovid and continue to explore and deepen that relationship.
And OMFG, yes! Found families are a theme that I absolutely adore in virtually any form of media (perhaps because I had to leave my own family of origin behind to go find "my own tribe")…
By the way, do you have that season 3 review link nearby? I'm not sure if I had the chance to read it yet, or if it somehow managed to pass me by… But I'd be interested to have a first or second read at it!
Otherwise, I pretty much found myself just nodding along while reading your comments.
I definitely think that, the first time Radovid meets Jaskier, he's deeply intrigued by him and how he personally connects with his songs, but still a bit in a "playing games" mindframe, because that's just the way his world is, and has always been, and how people communicate.
And now, I'm amazed, because you've just made me realise that, when Jaskier came to see Radovid wanting to share intel with him, it could very much have made it look like he only cared about Radovid's position, wealth, and resources; rather than about Radovid himself!
In many ways, Jaskier is 100% aware that the Crown Prince of Redania "fancies him", and I think that, under normal circumstances, he wouldn't be above taking advantage of that attraction to help protect his family.
To be clear, I don't think Jaskier would ever look to manipulate the emotions of anyone that would be having sincere, non-entitled, and reciprocal feelings for him.
But a royal that would be looking to own, use, or control him? I think he'd be feeling perfectly justified using his own charms to get what he wants from them.
He tells Vespula "you can't play a player", therefore very much perceiving himself as "a player", in a sense.
And, given that nobles often have an inflated ego and sense of self-importance, "playing them" is typically not that hard to do.
But Radovid does not.
He is far from immune to Jaskier's charms, but he does not perceive him as a some type of potential "trophy lover" or conquest. He's genuinely curious about him, and wishes to better get to know and understand him.
In such a context, trust should normally go both ways.
Jaskier tells Philippa and Radovid that, if they get rid of Rience, they will have earned Ciri's, Geralt's, and his own trust (and he talks about winning his own trust while pointedly looking at Radovid)…
But what is Jaskier willing to do to earn Radovid's trust in return?
You've just made me realise that, while I often tend to remind myself that there is lot that the audience knows about Radovid that Jaskier himself doesn't…
Well, there is also a lot that the audience knows about Jaskier that Radovid himself simply doesn't, too.
Sure, Jaskier's initial response towards learning that Radovid was the Crown Prince of Redania was rather flattering and amusing, especially since it brought a certain balance to the way Radovid himself was slightly starstruck by Jaskier.
Rockstar meets royalty, basically… and forgets to let his hand go, much to royalty's delight!
But, once that initial moment has passed, does Jaskier still only sees Radovid as a prince - with all the privileges tied to his position that he could use for his own gain - or a person that's worth knowing, too?
We all assume that Jaskier's motives are honorable, because we know him, but Radovid only knows about Jaskier's songs and what little he's been able to pick up from him during two rather short encounters.
In that context, Jaskier showing up all "So, I hear you've got money! Maybe you could use it to get the two detectives to talk, and help Geralt and I find out who Rience is working for?" could actually be… borderline insulting?
Technically, it wouldn't, if Radovid was into such things as power and influence, wanted to find Ciri for himself rather than to please his brother, and Jaskier's suggestion was helping him get closer to something he really wished to get closer to besides the man standing right before him.
Again, Jaskier doesn't know that; so, there's a bit of an ongoing comedy of errors happening between these two this season.
And he doesn't know that Radovid doesn't actually have that much money "ready to be handed out" like that, either.
That Radovid would have to first sell some of his own belongings to pay for that intel.
Jaskier's basically prancing right into the palace while making a bunch of (albeit flirtatious) assumptions about Radovid - most of them kinda wrong / only half right - and it's really no wonder Radovid himself would be unwilling to "collaborate" with him so easily, admit to what he knows, and instead choose to initially continue to play dumb/drunk!
To be fair, most nobles would likely love to be reminded of their wealth, status and power, and go "Oh yeah, I've got money and I'm so important, uwu!"
They would likely welcome any opportunity to put it on display and use it to further seduce Jaskier! Normally, a prince should have favorably responded to Jaskier's innuendos...
Whereas Radovid's pretty much "Yes, yes, very interesting… Now, enough about me, let's talk about you! Here's your lute, may I humbly ask you to sing about what you prefer singing the most? Please?Maybe your white-haired Witcher? I really want to get to know you…"
And look, the fact that Jaskier got his crush to agree to help him because he was moved by his singing, cares about him, and has made it his personal mission in life to learn to better understand what makes him so special, must be so much more satisfying to Jaskier’s than it being because Radovid likes to display his wealth and feel influential and important!
I mean, look at that face...
He's just so pleased with the unexpected way things turned out...
22 notes
·
View notes
Personal vent and ugly mental illness symptom talk
So, I should unpack this with my therapist, but shit's embarrassing, so I'm just gonna vent it out on the public internet lmao.
I was typing out a whole thing about how I KNOW I'm aromantic, and despite that, still have moments where my brain gaslights me into believing I'm in fairytale love.
I should preface by saying I have not officially been diagnosed with either additional mental illnesses I believe that I have (B.P//D and AD//HD [which lol being on AD//HD meds since antidepressants didn't do anything has given me some notable improvement, but I'm still without a diagnosis], nor Au//tism) DESPITE repeatedly asking multiple therapists multiple times and a psych like 100 times to give me a definitive yes or a no.
But holy shit. So I'm typing about how I've 'Favourite Person'-ed multiple people at multiple points in my life across all ages, and I'm like, okay, it's been a hot minute since I refreshed my definition of that, I should make sure that's still a thing and not something I just made up or has been dropped from the symptoms or whatever the case. I wanna make sure I'm using it right in this rant about how falling into Favourite Personing people in the past has made me believe 'wait, maybe I'm not aro, this HAS to be like the deepest truest love in existence, despite my years of knowing I'm aro.' Like, I'm so aro I once calculated out the date, months in advance, I was gonna tell someone I was dating that I loved them, only because it seemed like a socially acceptable amount of time to say it. I wasn't thinking about what I actually felt lmao. (And that was probably not a FP relationship, too, so I know that was absolutely an aro incident.)
Anyways, so I'm reading a couple articles to make sure I articulate my points about how it's conflicted with being aro, and I read about how people falling into having a FP will even hate that person for the slightest perceived wrongs. (I knew this, I just was thinking about the love incidents since that's what was related to my point about being aro.)
And holy shit. That just. Unlocked a memory I have about when I was an older kid, like probably 9ish (and older), I HATED my best friend of many years and who would continue being my bff for more years. Who was my everything. I couldn't stop thinking about how much I hated them. I would lie awake at night (insomnia too tho) thinking about how much I hated them and I couldn't understand why I didn't just stop being their friend and start hanging out with old friends more instead. I just couldn't do it, I wanted to hang out with THEM. I was so sick and feeling jealous of them whenever I found out they'd been hanging out with someone else one-on-one and I wasn't invited. Even when it was their own family. One time they brought me a plate of cookies by surprise for (before) a holiday that they'd just made with their cousin or something. And I felt so sick about how I wasn't there for that, it felt like an insult. I couldn't have put this into words, unless I just now read that point in an article and made a connection. It was so confusing, because usually the people who hated their 'best friend' was like, the mean girl kinda character who intentionally does it to hurt the innocent main character or something, but I was the one who felt wronged every time those feelings would come up. And this wasn't just a 'man it's so annoying when they do this specific thing.' This was active stewing, in a slow cooker, all day and all night kinda thing.
I was never romantically or sexually attracted to that person, but I probably wrote all this off as either unrelated sexuality or gender bullshit when I figured that out later. But knowing now that there was definitely someone (actually, I'm thinking of WAY more people as I'm typing this, and just realized why I stopped loving a band and started hating them 'for no reason' wow lmao) that I FP'ed who I definitely WASN'T attracted to, suddenly convinces me that I was probably right in suspecting B.P//D. (Or, y'know, maybe I don't have that specifically, and it's the symptom from a different facet of mental illness or whatever.) I've been so hung up over how I'm aro, sometimes ace, and then this 'only' happens towards people I am attracted to. Like, 'maybe it was love and I'm just terrible at it.' (No! It's not! Aro is correct! That's just the brain manipulating me to get another hit of dopamine off a FP! It's just easier to happen to someone I'm attracted to!)
It's no fucking wonder why I always worried about people hating me in secret, and it's because I was absolutely making myself insufferable because of that worry. I know for a fact that some people definitely did hate (or. Lmao. Shut up. Like, 'resented' maybe fits better) me for demanding constant attention that was never reciprocated by anyone I've ever met in my entire life.
I probably wrote-off so many symptoms as 'I was a moody teen and kind of an asshole.' Except it happened before and after I was a teen, too. I would have excused everything that happened during and before high school, when I should have been looking for these patterns I kept following for years after. It doesn't help that my first relationship was wildly toxic (mostly against me in this one case), and while I didn't feel particularly bothered by it after I got over the nightmare breakup, I just kept going 'What if it was the sole cause of all of this and I'm just repressing that?' Well, phew! No, it's not, that was thankfully just a toxic embarrassment, and not the source of all my problems. I was already on the shitstorm trajectory. That's a major relief. If you can call it that. I really don't like discussing that one, but not in a trauma way, more like a, you don't really wanna discuss pissing your pants on accident kinda way. Unpleasant to remember, wildly embarrassing to talk about, but ultimately not a life-altering event.
Ughhhhh. Maybe I should bring this (the mental illness not the relationship) up to the therapist. But like, I haven't been close friends with anyone in like 6 years or so, so I don't have any current or even recent examples about how being in friendships has always turned out Russian Roulette for me. My therapist doesn't seem to believe how bad it was for me to be in friendships where I was unintentionally FP'ing someone. Because besides the depression and anxiety (and mild OCD), I'm a totally normal person to her who's just dealing with shit health problems and grief (and frustration from being trans and not in a safe place to transition). Y'know, normal life problems most people will feel at some point, just chronic in my case. I may be weird, but I'm obviously far from the worst she's seen. I'm not uniquely mentally ill.
((Except the whole 'treatment resistant depression' diagnosis bullshit from the psych, but I'm learning it's not just mental issues I have that are treatment resistant lol.))
I tried talking to her about a small part of all this before, but IDK what I did wrong, she took it 100% as me being the one unintentionally wronged and not setting MY own boundaries (lmao), so like I don't know how to word this in a way she'd understand that most of my problems in this area were my own fault. (I mean that both negatively and neutrally, because it's an ugly side of mental illness, but not one I chose or know how to help.)
Not being in close friendships with anyone has had an understandably sane-ifying effect on me (barring the, y'know, depression/anxiety/OCD and baseline weirdness), which has gotten me trapped for the 5th time in 6 years of making my therapists believe I'm better off than I actually am. (I've done this to every therapist I've ever had before that, too.) But like, again, at least for the past 3 therapists and the latest psych, I AM actually better for not having close friends lmao. Only one therapist ever had one visit of me wanting to address these concerns specifically while they were currently active, and by the next visit, we had to shift exclusively to sudden new grief lol. (What a shitshow. It somehow always ends up that whenever I wanna treat an illness, it's like opening a can of worms, except the worms are firecrackers and I didn't set the can down and step back a few feet.)
Like, it obviously feels safer to not have close friends at all because there's no fear of abandonment if I have no one to begin with. And, genuinely, I operate better when I'm alone. But now that I've known safety, it's hard to imagine throwing myself back into the roulette wheel, hoping I don't land on red OR black. But fuck, man. It is lonely.
And being aro? It's freeing, and validating too, to have a word for it, but I'm not gonna mince words here, I hate it. I wish I could feel romantic love. Like normal, not mentally ill ""love."" I feel platonic love all the time, like for friends (not FP) always. I love saying 'I love you' to friends and meaning it. But I want to feel romantic love. I just don't. I just feel friendship, Favoriting, and/or sexual attraction sometimes. Probably why I'm so into shipping and fanfics. I got a lot more "probably why's" but I don't wanna go down that in this already vulnerable post lol. (I already made a whole post about one of the why's back in like 2013 or 14 lmao, without connecting it to this.)
Anyway, I put this whole mental illness and relationships deal into ugly imagery in a current fic WIP I'm working on, since recognizing I was aro took living through FP'ing a few 'romantic' relationships, before I even first heard the term FP. I only saw my experiences as 'I don't think I've been experiencing love' and that by itself felt like it fit. I didn't realize there was anything wrong, even as I outwardly said shit like 'I don't think I'm fit for being in a relationship' to the few people who asked me out, even when I wanted to say yes.
And then I kept trying to make relationships work lmao. I don't know why I even bothered. I just wanted to be wrong about being aro, especially when it was a point of contention (aro and ace separately) with some of the relationships.
I'd probably have to meet another aro person of the exact same flavour of aromanticism to make it work, but even then the mental illness would just be a ticking time bomb. No one wants to be the recipient of FP 'affection', except maybe sometimes the fictional people in a certain fiction trope that winds up being fetishistic, even if it's not intended to insult real people (but sometimes it is). And it's just a reminder of how I was probably a big source of toxicity for probably half the people who have ever been close with me, if it's even half of how fiction portrays people with this symptom.
I dunno where I wanted to end this vent, so here's probably a good place. Just wanted to get this off my chest, because it just now felt like a pretty big revelation that my problems weren't related to romanticism, I've had purely platonic instances of this dating back to being an older kid, and more during high school, and I just never connected the two before now.
1 note
·
View note
What frustrates me about disability advocacy is that...of all the people I've seen talk about it, 99% of them - even ones who are disabled themselves - have eventually proven that their support has limits. Really stupid and arbitrary ones, at that.
You support disabled people...but if you see an adult with a DIAPER BULGE in their pants in public it's ON SIGHT, get your kink out of my face! Actually, even if it's not a kink, that's still gross and, like, it's not like the diaper exists to CONTAIN waste, you're a biohazard! Just stay home!
You support disabled people...but, ugh, you're so sick of masks, they feel so icky, the CDC isn't advising them anymore so really how bad can it be, if you don't want to be permanently disabled even worse than you already are then why don't you just stay home forever?
You support disabled people...but if you see anyone using a non-conventional straw that someone's billed as "anti-aging" on TikTok you proudly declare that you'll smack them, because what do you mean it might be a motor control or sensory thing?
You support disabled people...but no one is REALLY so disabled that they can't manage their lights conventionally, clean their homes by themselves, or hold a pen for extended periods of time or at all; that's just something people make up as an excuse for Bad Tech and exploitative luxury services.
You support disabled people...but, god, control your by-definition-uncontrollable tics, they're SOOOO annoying and rude!
You support disabled people...but when someone stops masking or runs out of spoons and starts speaking in a choppy, hard-to-understand way, it's a joke.
You support disabled people...but AAC is, like, sooooo annoying and hard to understand, learn to talk like a normal person instead of pointing like a baby or whatever, geez.
You support disabled people...but you hate image descriptions and video transcriptions because they're, like, sooooo ugly and transcriptions SPOIL things. (Not to be confused with "frequently not having the spoons to translate images and videos into text, which is a skill; one which everyone should try to develop, but a skill nonetheless" - I get that, it happens to me, but if you take issue with OTHER people adding them to your posts for Aesthetic Reasons, you're...kind of a dick! I'm not sorry for saying it!)
You support disabled people...but you think teehee funny joke annotations are a much more valuable use of caption tracks than, you know, actual captions are.
You support disabled people...but you still concern-troll people with armchair diagnoses of heavily stigmatized disorders for harmless weirdness, or try to paint them as icons of some kind of horrible social ill.
You support disabled people...but you're still convinced that every asshole is mentally ill, probably A Narcissist, and what do you mean that's a loaded thing to call someone when a heavily stigmatized disorder is rudely misnamed as such too, isn't it easier to, like, change the name of the disorder throughout the whole system than it is to just stop using that word as your go-to Bad Person Pathologizing Word, which you definitely need? (Or worse, you see no problem with this clash because you're convinced it IS Bad Person Disorder...)
You support disabled people...but you see someone mumbling to themself on the bus and you get as far away from them as possible because it's "scary".
You support disabled people...but you constantly try to pull "gotcha"s about people telling you not to touch people's assistive devices.
You support disabled people...but someone being okay with their delusional disorder and talking about that is BAD and PROMOTING SELF-HARM.
You support disabled people...but your body positivity still focuses exclusively on "people can be healthy and fat at the same time!" as if people who ARE fat because of health issues and/or have health issues BECAUSE of their weight don't exist or deserve support.
You support disabled people...but you declare that advocates who want us all to have more access to things that improve your quality of life are the REAL ableists for acknowledging that those things that you currently can't do tend to improve quality of life.
You support disabled people...but your advocacy for yourself involves distancing yourself from people with more support needs than you.
You support disabled people...but you treat addiction of any kind, or use of anything with known addictive tendencies, as a moral failing.
You support disabled people...until the accommodations they need clash with your own, then it's not just a benign incompatibility that sucks just as much for them as it does for you; no, you are an innocent victim and they are a horrible ableist.
You support disabled people...until it's too inconvenient. Too weird. Too scary. Once that line is crossed, it's not a disability issue anymore, they're, conveniently, just a Bad Person.
It's fucking exhausting and I'm sick to death of it.
6K notes
·
View notes
It's so clear to me that so many so called "anti Zionists" - especially the non Palestinian goyim - have no idea how the Israeli election system works, and how bibi remains in power, and why we had five elections in like, three years, despite elections supposedly being every four years - because he couldn't keep a government stable enough to stay in power. Bibi netanyahu is MASSIVELY unpopular, and his approval rate has tanked even more since the war started, even among likud voters, the people who vote for HIS party (although their approval rates ranked less than the rest of the population). He has an extreme right wing government because if he didn't cooperate with right wing extremists and haredim he straight up wouldn't have the majority he needs to be our prime minister in the first place. He's been on trial for corruption for years at this point, and tried to completely restructure the judicial system just to avoid prison - leading to nearly a full year of protests until Oct 7. Luckily it didn't end up passing.
If elections were held at any point in the last five months since this war started, not only would he not be PM, we'd straight up have a center-left government. My recent transformation into a Yair Golan stan account is a joke but also 100% real - according to polls from the last three months or so, if he does what he's campaigning to do, leading a combined avoda and meretz party, he'd get enough votes to have an actual influential left wing party in the government for the first time in decades. An unbelievable amount of Israelis are calling for bibi to resign, many of them not calling for it to happen after the war ends, but right now.
I am sourcing this information from polls conducted by channels 11 (kan), 12, and 13, as well as by the Israeli democracy foundation, all but one of our important news channels - channel 14, the last channel, is our equivalent of fox news, and despite their numbers often being extremely different due to what is in my opinion biased reporting and flawed methodology, even they at times have had to admit that gantz is currently leading in the polls.
(Disclaimer that I work for a company that provides subtitles for channel 13, but i do not directly work for channel 13. Channel 13 leans mostly center left, and employs several (self identified) Arab Israelis in front of the camera, including Lucy Aharish, who makes considerable effort to bring Palestinian and Bedouin perspectives to her show. It also employs at least one massive racist though.)
I write this post because I keep seeing an unsourced claim by goyim that there's a poll showing a high rate of approval - 88%! - of the destruction and/or deaths Israel and the IDF are causing in Gaza. I went down a rabbit hole and simply couldn't find a poll asking about approval of deaths or destruction, although maybe I was looking up the wrong keywords? As a result I have just... So many questions. Because with the information I have from trustworthy local news sources, from the news channels I mentioned above and papers such as yediot aharonot/ynet and Haaretz, it doesn't fit with current public opinion, including many recent protests for more efforts towards a ceasefire. So my questions are thus -
Who conducted this poll? Was it a think tank, a government agency, a paper, a news channel? If so, which one? Are they left leaning, right leaning? Was it conducted by an Israeli or foreign institution?
Who did they ask? Was it a sample of likud voters; all Israeli adults; did they include only Jewish Israelis or also Arab citizens (approx. 1.5 million out of our 8 million population), Bedouins, and other minorities?
When was the poll conducted? Was it in October, immediately after the Oct 7 massacre, before the death toll in Gaza grew? Was it conducted more recently?
What, exactly, did they ask? Did they ask about destruction in general, or about the death toll in particular? Did they ask about the attempts to rescue hostages with military means, or all military actions? Did they ask about the number of Hamas operatives dead, about their estimated ratio of Hamas to civilians, about the total deaths?
What was the size of the pool surveyed? Was it conducted on a few dozen, a few hundred, or a few thousand people?
Because without this information, that one, sole statistic is essentially useless. As Mark Twain said, there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. Always look at the source and ask: who asked the questions, who got asked, and what the questions were.
More specific statistics and sources under the cut.
I did find one survey by the Israel democracy foundation that asked if the IDF should take the Gazan suffering into account - an entirely different question, although it did still have a horrific 89% Jewish Israelis and 14% Arab Israelis and Palestinian citizens who said they shouldn't. That said, the pool they were drawing from was not very large - 500 of the interviews were conducted in Hebrew, 100 were conducted in Arabic. Also, of the people who supposedly said that they shouldn't, a little more than half of both populations said they should "somewhat" take it into account - that is, they didn't say they shouldn't take it into account at all, just not make it their first priority. This survey was conducted mid December.
In another survey by the same source with a slight larger sample size (a little over 600 Jewish Israelis and a little over 150 Arab Israelis), an insanely low 15% still wanted Bibi to be the PM, with the only candidate who received more than 6.5% being the center candidate Benny Gantz, who historically has tried to cooperate with center and left parties, with a whopping 23% of the votes. The survey included 10 candidates, as well as five other non candidate options. 4% voted "just not Bibi", and an actually insane 30.5% voted they were undecided. Only a quarter of those surveyed believed Bibi would manage to maintain a coalition after the war, a number that includes more extreme right wing voters, and only the ultra Orthodox haredi population had a majority of people (60%) who believed he can. This survey was conducted in January.
The channel 13 news survey from early March - barely over a week ago! - covered more specifically which parties would manage to get into the government and how many seats they would get, as under a certain amount of votes you simply do not get seats. Not all seats get into a coalition. According to their poll, the amount of seats the likud would get is halved, from 32 to 17, while gantz's the state camp would grow from 12 to 39. While currently meretz gets 4 seats and haavodah do not get enough votes to get a seat at the table so to speak, a combined haavodah and meretz under Yair Golan gets 9 mandates. In total, the right wing only get 47 mandates, well short of the amount of mandates necessary to create a government.
Channel 12's corresponding poll from January shows 35 mandates for gantz, and bibi had 18 mandates. Channel 11, in the same month, gave gantz 33 mandates and bibi 20.
I also sources an English Jerusalem post article which reports on channel 14's polls; jpost is a right wing biased paper, and yet even they report 36 mandates for gantz and 18 for bibi as of February.
Sources
The Israel democracy institute: 1 (English), 2 (Hebrew), 3 (Hebrew)
Haaretz: 1 (English) (paywalled)
Channel 13: 1 (Hebrew)
Ma'ariv: 1 (Hebrew) (reporting on channel 12)
Podcast which summarizes the above article: 1 (English) (includes transcript)
Kan 11: 1 (Hebrew)
Jpost: 1 (Hebrew)
1K notes
·
View notes