#what’s not normal is calling for people not even involved in your fight to dogpile one person just bc they pissed you off specifically | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

star-anise · 3 years

Text

I wanna reply to a reblog someone added to one of my posts, because I want to wrestle with the ideas in it without singling out the person, who I do not think deserves any kind of dogpile for being wrong. That said, I think this person is incorrect in a way that’s both common and dangerous.

TW: Domestic violence and abuse, sexual assault

This person says:

So hear me out: I am too weak to abuse a woman.

I live a very sedentary lifestyle and most of the women i’m interested in and who have shared interest could easily beat me in a fight. [...] so I would never raise a fist to them not just because it’s wrong but because i’m afraid of getting hurt back.

As a society, we are way, way too obsessed with punching people as the ultimate form of domestic violence. This is dangerous and wrong. It causes a lot of people to think, “My home life isn’t a boxing match, so I’m not being abused,” and/or “I’m not actually hitting them, so I’m not really abusive.”

I am a 5′1″/155cm disabled woman with weak and noodly arms who can’t perform a lot of basic household tasks like carrying a week’s groceries up a flight of stairs. And I could absolutely abuse someone. It isn’t about physical strength.

Abuse is not just a “man bad, woman victim” dynamic. It can happen to and by people of every gender. We need to focus on the realities of abuse and the many ways it can manifest.

In this post: What domestic violence can look like, other than hitting; how domestic violence can happen without huge explosive fights; what healthy relationships would look like instead; why it’s wrong to think of abusers as a different species from normal people.

Domestic violence might look like:

Criticizing or belittling someone’s interests or self. Making negative statements about who they are as a person. Treating them with contempt or derision. Calling them names.

Controlling everything about where a person goes, what they do, and who they talk to. Never allowing them privacy or outside relationships. Monitoring their emails or texts; listening in on their phone calls. Refusing to allow someone reasonable boundaries.

Breaking a person’s belongings. Damaging or wrecking their personal space. Throwing things at or near them.

Controlling their access to basic needs, eg. depriving them of access to money, transportation, food, medicine, or communication with the outside world.

Failing to respect someone’s personal and sexual boundaries.

As well, these things count as abuse whether or not they happen as a Big Loud Scary Confrontation, or quietly, in the consequences afterwards. Like, it counts whether you say “You will never be allowed to leave this house without me!” or just quietly spend the money that was going to repair your partner’s car on something else. It counts whether you force a sexual act on someone who’s visibly resisting, or refuse to speak to or even acknowledge someone for several days after they’ve set a sexual boundary.

And it can be hard, in a relationship, to figure out what healthy and reasonable boundaries are. These are rules that abusers can use to their own ends, rhetorically maximizing the harm to themselves and minimizing their harm to others. “By being in the house when I’m on work phone calls, you’re denying my right to privacy,” they’ll say, ignoring that forcing their partner to be out of the house for eight hours a day is denying them access to basic shelter and they need a different solution, or, "By pointing out how scared and hurt you were by my violent behaviour, which I cannot possibly be expected to change, you’re criticizing me and belittling my feelings.”

At which point it can help to focus on what a healthy relationship would look like:

Consensual: Everyone involved is freely choosing to be there and can, if they want, leave the relationship without serious impairment of their ability to live an independent life

Surrounded by resources: Partners are able to turn outside the relationship, if they want, to express their emotions, achieve their goals, pursue their interests, connect with family and friends, receive support, or take time away from their partner. This is regarded as enriching each partner’s life and strengthening the health of the relationship.

Safe: No one feels threatened or in danger. People are able to assume that their partners will have their best interests and happiness at heart. Partners ensure that everyone in the relationship has what they need. Nobody has to worry that a disagreement or bad day with their partner will make other parts of their life unmanageable.

Respectful: Everyone’s emotions and values matter and are given equal weight. Everyone is seen as deserving the same basic rights to material security, safety, emotional validation, and physical space.

Fair: When there is a conflict, partners work together in a respectful and non-combative way to negotiate a solution that is acceptable to everyone.

Honest and accountable: People admit to the part they play in things and are willing to own their contributions to both success and conflict.

Mutually enriching: Each partner is committed to the goal of a relationship that leaves them all, collectively and individually, better off as people: receiving everything they need, capable of independence, supported and validated, and treated with respect.

Healthy relationships are complicated! They can be really difficult. They demand a lot of interpersonal and social skills that don’t come naturally, so if you haven’t been taught them, you can really struggle. I can really struggle. Anyone can really struggle.

It is really important to realize that abuse doesn’t result from someone waking up like, “I think I will be a Horrible Person to my partner today” and getting ready to rumble. It results from people with limited coping skills and particular attitudes about relationships and how to handle conflict trying to get what they want. Someone could be a really great partner, up until they encounter a problem they don’t feel able to solve any other way than overriding their partner’s feelings and using what force is available to achieve their goal.

But those are things we have the ability to address and improve, if we want to. A few starting places:

Positive ways to avoid toxic conflict

Signs of emotional abuse

Resources for domestic violence

If you want to support my work writing this kind of content, please consider supporting me through PayPal or Patreon.

#staranise original #domestic violence tw #ipv tw #intimate terrorism tw #emotional abuse tw

741 notes · View notes

vantaba · 5 years

Text

INTERVIEW MEME.

Tagged by: Stole it days ago I’m just super slow at this (thANKS @monsterbane ) Tagging: take it! and tag me because I like reading about everyone’s muses

——— character question sheet

▌real name: Richard Vantaba. ▌real name: On a very technical level, if he wanted to take his grandfather’s inheritance into account in his daily life, his name would be something along the lines of Richard Vantaba Stratos of the Deep Hell. He doesn’t care all too much for it though. ▌single or taken: Single. Never really cared much about getting into a relationship-- he’s very comfortable with the idea and had flings before when just moving in, but for the time being, he focuses on his job too much to think about taking a partner. ▌abilities or powers: ... this warrants its own post, let’s be real. Base level descriptions include accelerated recovery rate, increased strength, energy influence, Devil Trigger, and a few others. ▌eye colour: Gold. ▌hair colour: Dusty blond. ▌family members: Mother, Scythia, renowned demon assassin, daughter of a Draconic Count of the Deep Hell-- missing. Father, Ryan, a Romanian half-demon-- deceased in an anti-demon rally. Grandfather, Stratos, Count of the Deep Hell-- asleep, but alive. ▌pets: None-- looking for one though. ▌something they don’t like: Corrupt hunters on just about any job. This transcends the ‘demons vs monsters’ argument that plagues him internally, as if you’re not being a good sport about your mission, you might as well just purchase pieces from the underground market and sell them yourself. It was more prominent during his monster period, before opening up to going after demons-- too many people would sign wavers and leave enough for others to take from the corpse, but overall, ended up taking much more than their share. This is still true on some demon-hunting jobs Vanta’s been on, but not as common as with monsters.

▌hobbies/activities: He does consider reading a hobby, although it’s often job-related-- he’ll go the extra mile to research his quarry and document everything he can in a handmade bestiary. Book binding is another, although he doesn’t talk much about it. And despite the product being goods he can sell, he enjoys fabrication using the parts he gets. ▌ever hurt anyone before: Once, late one night his first month in the city. Promised never to do it again, because humans aren’t his target, despite being more demon. ▌ever killed anyone before: No, and wouldn’t dream of it. ▌animal that represents them: Power-wise, komodo dragons-- his gold ichor in Devil Trigger has many of the same properties as a dragon’s venom, but through pure, demonic heat instead. Personality-wise though, he’s more of a beardie; chill with just about anything, but Spiky. ▌worst habits: He’s very closed off and withdrawn emotionally from everything. It’s unknown if it was his time at the church teaching him to repress emotional outbursts or his actual genetic makeup keeping him from it, but he bottles everything he feels that isn’t positive or ‘publicly acceptable’ from him. These outbursts got to the point of actually destroying his room back at the church because he couldn’t get mad at the kids there for taunting him, he kept telling himself it was the influence of the environment they were raised in, where they couldn’t wait to dogpile on an outsider. He also has a habit of physically separating himself from groups when he wants to be alone, often using his job as an excuse. There’s been days where he goes right from a mission to bed instead of phoning his client, and exists in this limbo until the swing passes. He’s already been passive with his depression in the first place, but these spirals are some of the worst days of his life because he can’t be social with the small network he’s built. ▌role models: A lot of his friends would qualify. As bad of a choice as it would be, he still thinks very highly of Dante, possibly only outstripped by his respect of Lady. As people who excel in their job and with different methods, the fact he’s gone on missions with them is enough to feel he’s been validated by the universe. ▌sexual orientation: Pan on everything for sure. He’s not one to care about the orientation of his partner, as long as he can genuinely enjoy their company and feel comfortable getting in a relationship with them. ▌thoughts on marriage/kids: Truthfully, the idea of fathering children scares him. He doesn’t want to give them a life like his, where they have to hide their heritage just to live a normal, day-to-day life. There’s a part of him that feels he could never be as kind as his parents were when raising him, and the responsibility is something he wouldn’t want to feel become a burden. As for marriage though, he’s alright with it. If he ever meets a partner he’s happy enough with, he’ll even genuinely consider it, although more for the human ritual of it and what it would symbolize. His demon mind still has its views on how partnership works. ▌fears: While he can survive just about anything relatively unscathed (human-wise with threats anyhow; he’s used to fighting demons to the point of not minding much), his own durability lies at the heart of what he fears the most. He’s scared of the idea of going berserk, and losing the last shreds of humanity he clings to. If he rampages, there’s no stopping him by conventional means; at least, in the case of his friends who aren’t hunters or versed in dealing with demon threats. Even worse, going after innocents he doesn’t even know and becoming as rogue as some of the demons he hunts. The worst part is, this day will come no matter what he does to try to stop it, only coming short of being killed. ▌style preferences: Whatever he manages to pull out of the closet before going somewhere, which usually involves a lot of dark grays, ranging from his oversized leather coat to dark jeans that button right below the point where his legs transition to scales. For fancier nights, you can find him wearing his button-down with black dress pants, all signs he’s a demon hidden for as long as he can stay comfortable-- and even then, he’ll likely keep his legs human to fit in the tighter pants. Sleepwear style is just boxers with SSSmokin’ patterned across them ▌someone they love: He’s never considered the idea of romantic love before, but he very much platonicly loves the bookstore owner a few blocks from his place. She saved him from a few binds in the past and he’s kept her shop selling by advertising it at his place. There’s a few others that kept him out of bad situations before, though, but she comes to mind first. ▌approach to friendships: There’s those that he considers acquaintances, and those he considers his inner circle. His occupation leads him to keep closed off but approachable-- he’ll get along with people, but only keep a handful as contacts he’d call outside of work and have a drink with, maybe see a movie or go to the beach or even downtown. If he considers someone a good friend, he invites them to be part of his life outside of his job, which is one of the most open things he could do. ▌thoughts on pie: mmmmmm yes give him all the sweet potato pie. ▌favourite drink: ... fruity stuff. He’d still take a Shirley Temple over fine wines and alcohols. ▌favourite place to spend time at: His shop. He’s met some really interesting people and a few regular browsers. If anything, it’s a great time to draw attention to himself, which he enjoys every now and then. A close second is the tavern up the street, where hunters of both creatures tend to gather, so he picks up side jobs there when he can. ▌swim in the lake or in the ocean: Lakes. They’re more frequent in his line of work anyways, and he’s more comfortable in the confined space of a pond or lake. Plus, he doesn’t have to work hard at getting salt out of his scales-- it irritates him something fierce. ▌their type: Vanta doesn’t really have one, per say. He’s all about being mushy, but more behind closed doors at first. When it really starts to sink in, he’ll become more open about it, but generally he doesn’t mind whoever wants to woo him. ▌camping or indoors: Camping. He’d rather take camping over taking a motel for the night.

#➤ There's just some things that shouldn't be written down in a bestiary 『Muse info』#➤ Filed and completed 『Meme response』#[ THIS WAS LONG BUT it was probably the most fun I've had on a meme yet ]

2 notes · View notes

avaantares · 5 years

Note

So uh, I’m really really disappointed with the Torchwood fandom right now (over what you addresses in your post about being respectful/a normal human being online), and I’m just not quite sure how to deal with that. Sorry to barge in with this, but you seem like a really understanding, level-headed person 😅

I feel you, Anon, and you are certainly not the only one I’ve heard from! A number of people have told me they’ve been growing more uncomfortable with the fandom’s atmosphere lately, and have been actively avoiding posting about certain topics for fear of dogpiling. (This actually came up in a few private conversations before I made the post you referenced, and helped cement my decision to speak up.)

This post is long, so here’s a dash-saver. Below the jump I talk about the state of the Torchwood fandom, how people can avoid and resolve drama on their own posts, and some things everyone can do to make the internet a nicer place.

While my recent post was not targeted solely at the Torchwood fandom (the “how dare you differ in opinion from me” trend is disturbingly widespread; see also: politics), it is true that there has been a lot of sectionalism and polarization in that fandom lately. Fandom niches have always existed, but as the Torchwood fandom shrinks – whether due to natural attrition, lack of interest in the new content, or whatever reason – the Venn circles for each area of interest also shrink, making each group appear more segregated, and resulting in less crossover and less generalized Torchwood fandom.

Now, specific interest groups within the fandom are not a bad thing! They occur naturally, since not everyone engages with fandom the same way. Some people listen to the new Big Finish releases, while others have only seen the original series. Some people enjoy trading headcanons, while others aren’t interested. Some people create fanart or fanfiction, while others just reblog gifsets. Some people are only in the fandom for one specific character, and that’s okay! We’re all fans of the same source material; we can all share and respect each other’s unique interests!

The problems arise when we stop doing that, when interest groups become isolationist (i.e. ”we’re the only real fans”), or when one group decides their focus/interest is more important than another group’s or individual’s. If any group begins policing or calling out other fans who don’t share their views, that’s a problem. If fans are afraid to share their opinion on a topic because of the threat of harassment or name-calling from other fans, that’s a problem. If we can no longer politely discuss our respective viewpoints or agree to disagree, that’s a problem. If we all start blocking each other because we can’t get over the fact that Person A loves Gwen Cooper and Person B doesn’t, or Person C ships Person D’s NoTP, or Person E headcanons a character as a particular sexuality/alignment/whatever and Person F has a different headcanon, there will be no fandom left because everyone who loves Torchwood will be on another fan’s block list.

“But wait!” Person A cries. “[Opinion I hold] is really important to me, and is relevant to my personal identity! By disagreeing with me, Person B is being disrespectful to my identity!”

Sorry, but no. Certainly, Person A is allowed their opinion, and that opinion may well be informed by their personal identity or beliefs. But Person B is also allowed an opinion, which may also be informed by their identity or beliefs. Person A’s personal opinion is no more or less valid than Person B’s. It’s not about B being disrespectful to A by voicing an alternate opinion; it’s about both A and B showing mutual respect by acknowledging that the other person has an opinion.

Of course, just because you’re fully entitled to state an opinion doesn’t mean you are correct, or that you have license to say anything you want free of consequence. Any time you put your opinion out there, you are opening yourself up to disagreement or rebuttal.

“So how can I avoid people aggressively disagreeing with me?” Person A asks. “I hate reading dissenting viewpoints, especially on my own posts.”

Well, you have two options. Option 1 is for those who honestly can’t handle any level of conflict or disagreement, and that’s not to post your opinion at all.

“That’s no fun!” says Person A. “I like to share my opinions.”

Well, that brings us to Option 2: Set the tone of your posts. See, here’s the thing: If you post your opinion in an agonistic manner, you’re more likely to elicit agonistic response. Here’s an example of two different post tones:

A’s Post: I went outside today and looked up, and the sky looked blue to me, so I think the actual color of the sky must be blue.

This is a clear statement of opinion, phrased with supporting rationale, but it’s focused on the person who holds that opinion, rather than targeting or disparaging someone who subscribes to a different one. A dissenter might counter with this:

B’s Response: I’ve always thought the sky looked white. Those puffy spots up there are definitely white, so I think that’s the real color of the sky.

It’s relatively polite, with no offensive personal remarks, and (again) it’s focused on why they personally believe what they do. It is likely that this sort of rational discussion could continue for many exchanges without becoming heated or aggressive. Maybe one will convince the other, or maybe they’ll stick to their own beliefs and agree to disagree, but nobody’s getting hurt and nobody’s getting blocked.

Now, compare that to this type of post:

A’s Post: OMG I hate when those white-sky idiots say the sky is white, they must all be MORONS because it’s clearly BLUE and if you don’t agree you’d best unfollow me NOW because i don’t want you anywhere near my posts. This is a BLUE SKY ONLY BLOG.

This person has already personally attacked anyone with a different view, drawn a line in the sand, and declared that this is the hill they will die on – all without supporting their opinion with a shred of evidence or reason. Naturally, this will only serve to inflame the other side:

B’s Response: HOW DARE YOU CALL ME A MORON, I’ll have you know I have a Master’s Degree in Cloud Watching and I wrote my thesis on why the sky is white. Only uneducated idiots think the sky is blue. BLOCKED.

Yeah, this exchange is never going to result in any kind of rational discussion. It is already 100% emotional, and there is no actual discussing going on, just name-calling. Getting involved in this kind of argument is a waste of time and energy, will not change anyone’s mind, and will only succeed in stressing out all parties.

“But the sky really IS blue!” Person A protests. “It doesn’t matter what tone I take, I’m still right!”

Nah, in this case both sides are wrong. The sky’s apparent color depends on the angle of the sun’s rays, humidity, and the way light in the visible spectrum is scattered by air molecules. It looks blue when the sun is high, and red or orange when the sun is near the horizon, but the sky itself is colorless. (There’s your science fact for the day). Ultimately, it doesn’t matter how right OP thinks they are; chances are the other person is just as convinced that they’re right, and it’s entirely possible that you’re fighting over something completely arbitrary or fundamentally unimportant.

And that brings me back to the Torchwood fandom and the hill-I-will-die-on arguments that have been plaguing it more and more in recent months. There is one thing I think we can ALL agree on, no matter our individual interests, and that is that Torchwood’s canon is a hot buttered mess. The original TV series is internally inconsistent; the novels contradict both the TV series and other novels; the comics contradict themselves, the novels, and the TV series; Miracle Day contradicts EVERYTHING that came before, including parent series Doctor Who; and the Big Finish dramas try really hard to respect all the prior releases, and mostly just end up creating their own canon, because it’s utterly impossible to reconcile everything. If canon can’t even agree on relatively simple things like

whether or not Jack can get drunk (no: BBC novels / yes: also BBC novels)

whether or not Jack can sleep/dream (no: TV and BBC novels / yes: also TV and BBC novels, plus BBC audio dramas)

if Jack and Ianto went on a date after KKBB (yes: BBC novels / no: also BBC novels)

what year Owen was born (1980: TV and Torchwood Magazine / 1981: TV and BBC novels)

what Ianto’s sister’s last name is (Evans: The Torchwood Archives / Davies: CoE)

…there are bound to be contradictory fan views on more complex issues, and there may not be a clear “correct” or “incorrect” position. It is possible to find canon support for nearly any Torchwood headcanon, because Torchwood canon is consistently inconsistent. Don’t make every issue a hard line in the sand. Accept that people are different, and based on their own unique backgrounds and experiences, people can legitimately come to different conclusions when presented with the same canon evidence (or lack thereof).

(Hmm… it’s almost like this principle could also apply to real-life sources of conflict like politics, religion, and social and cultural norms. Maybe keeping an open mind is a good idea in general…?)

“Well, it’s MY blog, and I can say what I want,” says Person A. “If people don’t like it that’s their problem.”

That is absolutely true. But remember, whatever you put out there is likely going to come right back at you. If you go with a rude or aggressive stance, or if you make personal attacks, you should expect your replies/reblogs to be just as nasty. If you escalate, so will they.

“Okay, so what if I post something polite and someone STILL comes back with a nasty response?” Person A asks. “I’m honestly feeling so attacked right now, and it isn’t even my fault!”

There are a couple of solutions to this that don’t involve breaking out the napalm:

Check for a misunderstanding. It’s hard to interpret tone in plain text sometimes. If you think the person may have honestly misinterpreted your post, maintain the polite tone and either clarify your post, or ask them (nicely) to explain why they are so upset about what you posted. Look for resolution, rather than merely refuting their post.

Don’t respond. “Be the bigger person” may sound cliche, but believe it or not, the world will not end if you choose not to engage someone on the internet. There is great power in putting down the phone or stepping away from the keyboard, and it’s much better for your blood pressure and stress level. Plus, if that person keeps raging on posts and not getting any responses, it may make them wonder why nobody pays attention to their opinions. Speaking of which…

“YOO-HOO!” hollers Person Z from waaaaaaay over in the corner. “Hi there! I just came for the fanart, and I’d like to participate more, but I’m really stressed out by the way this fandom is arguing all around me. I’m worried that if I post anything, someone will yell at me and tell me I’m wrong. That would really upset me.”

So let’s talk positive reinforcement for a second! This is where the casual observers and innocent bystanders can have a lot of power to steer the direction that fandom grows. Ultimately, the goal of all social media is to elicit interaction, whether that’s in the form of Likes, Reblogs, Replies, Retweets, Shares, Follows, or what have you. Giving posts this kind of interaction is like praising the writer. Reblogging also makes that post visible to more people, potentially attracting them to your fandom circle. Posts with more notes get seen more, read more, and can set the tone for other fandom interactions. The more rational, polite posts get spread around and accumulate notes, the more rational, polite people will be likely to get involved, and the more likely a new post on that topic will be worded in a rational, polite way. Whereas interacting with argumentative, nasty, stressful posts will tend to make new people avoid your fandom, and will encourage more people to turn things into a drama-fest because that’s what gets the notes, and notes are currency.

So when you see a post that just looks like a slap-fight or upsets you in some way, just ignore it and keep right on scrolling. You don’t need to attract drama to yourself or your blog, and you don’t need to feed that machine. But if you see someone doing it right, or if there’s an ongoing polite discussion, consider getting involved in the conversation! You can comment, reblog, reply or just like if you don’t have anything to add. Pay the polite, thoughtful interactions in notes and let the harsh posts die an unreblogged death.

So, dear Anon, that’s a very long-winded expansion on my previous post, and one you didn’t exactly ask for. :) But you’re not alone; many of us want to initiate change for the better. I hope we can help the fandom return to the happier, more collaborative place it was not so long ago.

Be kind to each other, be respectful, let go of whatever is driving you to have the last word, and we’ll all have more fun and significantly lower blood pressure.

#torchwood #fandom #social media #social interaction #stress management #guidelines for discussions #slapfights on the internet #long post #anonymous

32 notes · View notes