• 4 Posts
  • 122 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: September 13th, 2023

help-circle



  • Can’t diagnose borderline in teenagers. Personality is not set, hormones are wild, personality disorders aren’t really appropriate models. Hearing voices could be borderline, early schizophrenia (not common in teens, but drug use might play into this), lies for attention… We don’t have enough to suggest that with more evidence (which is always true when we’re weirdos on the internet).

    It tends to be thrown around too freely (like how everyone has NPD now) and misdiagnosed in women too imho. I suspect it’s often actually PTSD (sexual trauma) or ASD.

    I’m not a psych, but I’ll happily be called out by one.


  • I think the key is not to think of drawing as a like a skill you can cap out. It’s more that it’s an art form which if it’s really for you, you’ll spend time interrogating and exploring it and finding your own “level.”

    Like, if it’s just because you want a medium for story telling because of the comic - if it’s a barrier - a lot of really good webcomics shine because they use other techniques. Or sometimes writers and artists work together.

    Something that helped me go from stick figures to things recognizable as animals and my environment was a drawing course from the Smithsonian (online during Covid - I think they still have regular courses though). That kind of formal instruction helps you focus on what is is essential and gives you opportunities for specific feedback. Being encouraged to invest in things like charcoal, pencils, the right kind of paper - these things aren’t necessary but then sometimes part of learning to enjoy a hobby is spending $5 on a pencil.













  • What time periods/places are you interested in? I am able to and would be happy to give you a detailed list of primary and secondary sources for a good chunk of concepts.

    That’s the big thing - historians tend to focus. Even the university “western history from 1500” or whatever are going to vary a lot by what the professor is interested in and focused on. Behind just focusing on like a whole country or time period, they get super specific and do shit like figure out that whole undocumented kingdoms existed based on numismatic work (coins) or look at things like architectural influences that the crusaders brought back and can be seen in their classes (I had a prof who had a whole feminist interpretation of medieval castle architecture)

    Your comment alludes to the history of religion, which is definitely a complicated topic and has its own complexities in historiography (the study of history and techniques). Religion has interactions with so many other spheres, and so you also often have to dive deeply into the culture and history of the specific people who practiced it to understand the why - which is hard, because religious interpretations that are common now tend to get read backwards into the text.

    I’d be happy to give you a list of sources for any religion as well. (Do you feel most comfortable with texts for popular audiences, or would you like to explore academic material?)





  • Post-modernism laid the groundwork for an ‘I have my facts and you have yours’ culture.

    I feel like this is a common regressive take. The Right/anti intellectualist movement understood postmodernism as giving them the right to claim that facts don’t matter.

    Post modernism itself is a way of interrogating frameworks we take for granted. It’s not saying “facts don’t matter,” it’s saying “how do we know those are facts”? There are valid questions to ask about science as a way of knowing - which epistemological frameworks we take at face value, and if we really can. Lolita is a postmodernist work, because it’s asking you to interrogate what a novel means (in the context of an unreliable narrator - HH is lying to you, but he isn’t real. what does that mean about what is being described in a novel? Is a novel a window into a different universe which has a reality to be described?)

    The Right’s unreality is more of a Romantic one - none of those fuckers are reading Derrida or Deleuze. It’s more related to sexual insecurities and the death drive. I’m not a Freudian but I look at anti intellectuals and see deep sexual confusion and fear. If “male” and “female” are permeable categories, how does someone who defines their existence solely by their white masculinity going to police the boundaries of their own identity?