We read to know that we are not alone.
Last update
2020-07-12 22:24:24

    something that people really dont understand about ADHD is that we dont “jump from one idea to the next”

    we have very fast, very associative minds that connect ideas. we have a train of thought, it just goes WAY faster than yours!

    example: im thinking about dogs. that makes me think of pitbulls, which makes me think of an animal planet show i enjoy. the show connects to tv in general, which makes me think of my favorite cartoon. i associate my favorite cartoon with art and animation, and i wind up thinking about shading techniques.

    TL;DR: having ADHD is kinda like playing a lifelong game of 7 Degrees of Kevin Bacon



    I am plagued by this but also that associative learning makes it really easy to be a hyper-generalist in terms of skills and knowledge.

    This is how my brain works….

    The downside is, very few people can keep pace with these jumps, and I’ve actually been told my “mind leaps” are annoying.


    Let that sink in.

    Being told that the way my mind makes connections between Point A and Point D while seemingly bypassing B and C is “annoying”.

    … this.

    It drives my husband absolutely NUTS- we’ll be having a conversation and in a lull between sentences I’ll have jumped ahead six topics, pop back in with a “Yeah, and-“

    Meanwhile, he’s looking at me like I’ve grown another head. To him, whatever I’ve just said is a total non sequitur, but I can track EXACTLY how I got there… it just doesn’t make any sort of sense to anyone but me.

    I wanna print this shit out and slap people who ask me ‘where the fuck did that come from?’ across the face with this.

    Sometimes the things you plant take a couple of years to appear. I'm pretty sure I planted bee balm seeds a couple of years ago and nothing happened...until now! https://www.instagram.com/p/CChSav7jBZZcphnKkG55FGikIQuyAuMmJDXn_Q0/?igshid=19wnn2mz4qv75

    Hey gang, for those of you who reached out wanting to know more about the Scottish historian who did the deep dive into how Scottish identity got co-opted by the KKK and why a lot of things like “Scottish Pride” days are actually racist rallies in the USA, the name of the full documentary is “Who Put The Klan Into Ku Klux Klan” with Neil Oliver.

    If you’ve got Amazon Prime it’s available on Prime Video. It’s also available to rent on YT for what looks like $1.99, though I am sure those of you who are more resourceful than I am might be able to find it elsewhere for the low low price of free.

    Fair warning, it does deal with the events of the Charleston church shooting, and Neil also talks with some members of the church which is quite an emotional and heartbreaking moment. It also contains imagery featuring the KKK which can be disturbing. There is absolutely zero glorification of the Klan or anyone associated with them, past or present and any sort of “oh but the Scots had it rough coming here too” gets absolultey fucked right out the water as being absolutely abhorrent and despicable. It is depicted as the vile and evil blight against humanity that it is, and Oliver makes no attempt to hide his horror, rage and dismay when dealing with certain interviewees, though he does remain comendably calm and doesn’t just haul off and punch the guy, even when you can tell he really wants to.

    So yeah. There’s some links and details for y’all.

    Hi Joy. I can add to this, if you’d like to share it with your followers.

    I’m a Scottish historian and folklorist, but I work primarily in folklore now. I have a lot of thoughts about this topic. Because it is currently the primary topic that folklorists are discussing, especially those who specialise in Scottish, Irish, or Scandinavian folklore.

    I first became aware of the issue in the early 2000s, when neoNazis were appropriating any type of ‘Celtic’ (a problematic word, but it will do for now) festival or celebration. They were also approaching people at the Highland Games in the USA, assuming that anyone proud of their Scottish heritage was only a short distance away from interest in ‘white pride’.

    Today, it has become such an extreme problem that folklorists discuss it. The people who approach us who claim interest in these topics could very easily be neoNazis and often are. This means we tend to look with suspicion at anyone who is a little too deeply invested already, or is wearing jewelry/has tattoos/etc. of various symbols - including things like Thor’s hammer, I’m sorry to say, for all you Marvel fans out there. Celtic symbols of any kind are worthy of suspicion, particularly crosses or triquetra (sorry, Charmed fans). These are often dogwhistles, and folklorists discuss the need to be extremely cautious now compared to even ten years ago.

    All that said, the other problem is that Scotland and Ireland have long suffered from Othering - romanticising their realities. When your ‘identity’ as an American ‘Scottish’ or ‘Irish’ person makes you want to believe that this means anything about your personality or your family to the detriment of the people actually living and working in the country today, it’s a problem. ‘I drink a lot/have to drink a lot because I’m Scotttish!’ is one I’ve heard a few times. These are real, live people, with real lives, who don’t act like one thing or another. There’s nothing inherently noble about being Scottish, Irish, Scandinavian, etc.

    I realise the media is invested in all this romanticisation, too. Whether it’s the ‘Scottish people are like, 1 inch away from raping people’ of Outlander (inaccurate both historically and currently, in fact I’d argue Outlander is the least-historically accurate of all media I’m aware of regarding Scotland), or the complete insanity of Braveheart, or insert other media here, it’s an issue for the people living in that country. There are entire tours that avoid Glasgow, for example, because the city is so much…just a modern city. I worked with some guys from Visit Scotland who had taken my folklore course, and they told me ‘Glasgow doesn’t sell’. Because Glasgow isn’t fantasy-Scotland. When people become tourist attractions to overlay a fantasy on, ignoring their lived realities, it’s a real issue.

    A while ago, a friend of mine asked me to vet another folklorist for her. This friend of mine is pagan. I have many pagan friends, some of whom are witches. When I told her these things, she got absolutely furious with me, claiming well obviously not all folklorists are talking about it because he’s not! No, we’re talking about it to each other because of how dangerous the proliferation of neoNazis has become, and that includes paganism and witchcraft. If you find yourself getting that defensive about these topics, it’s time to take a step back and wonder why you are invested to the point of obsession. 

    We’re not saying that everybody who is pagan, or into witchcraft, or into Scottish/Irish/Scandinavian heritage is a neoNazi, but to be aware of those who are. And of how your interest will look to outsiders, especially those of us who have been scholars of the subject for a very long time.

    Another problem is when people are confronted with historical facts that do not gel with their presupposed ideas about what Scotland or Ireland was like. People want it to be magical so badly that when they find out the actual religious heritage of these nations they get very upset or refuse to believe it. Either you like and are interested in these places despite what they can do for you, and despite what you find out about them, or you aren’t interested in them at all - you’re interested in a prop for your personal fantasy. Again, these are real places with real people whose lived experiences don’t need to agree with your preconceived notions of them.

    I’m going to finish this by agreeing completely that Scottish people in Scotland also need to recognise that they aren’t morally pure just because they’re Scottish, but this is more about Brexit, the independence movement, and immigration. Yes, Scottish people were treated badly, but they also treated others and each other badly. Arguably the worst incident in all of Scottish history was the second Clearances, and that was Scottish people doing it to each other.

    To conclude: Scottish history and culture is fascinating. I know this because it’s my job. However, the intense investment people have in ‘things Celtic’ can be a dangerous thing.

    Thank you @caledoniaseries you’re as spot on as ever. And the paganism is a good point too. Whenever I mention my faith, or lack thereof given I’m secular, in passing or someone brings it up, I invariably get an influx of new followers who ascribe to a particularly neo-Celtic brand of nonsense. They will test the waters by trying to get my opinion on several things, usually pertaining to “traditional values” and “our shared heritage”.

    Invariably they turn out to be exclusionists with delusions of personal magic powers that “link” them to my homeland, which they dare to turn into their egotistical warped fantasy of white supremacy and mystic woo.

    So like sorry if I’m cagey as fuck if all you want to do is ask innocent questions about my personal beliefs, but this is the flip side of what I’m dealing with on a fairly regular basis and it is insidious.

    And just in case you’re one of those new followers, let me save you the trouble of testing the waters, and allow me to formally invite you to choke.

    In case anyone thought I was joking, this is just <>one<> of the posts I could spend the time tracking down about this topic, just on Tumblr alone; I’m not lying when I say this is a well known problem among anyone who gives a shit in Celtic paths, and their related academic fields.

    This is so so SO incredibly important to be aware of if you do follow some kind of Celtic path. We need to be aware of this garbage because it is in our house and it is our job to take it out.

    Romance, Sex, and Friendship (a quick literature review by someone with no expertise in the field)

    Okay so… being the giant easily distracted nerd I am, spurred by @taibhsearachd and @bygodstillam​ ‘s questions and discussion this morning, I actually dove into a brief literature search on the research work being done on sexual vs romantic vs friendship +/- asexuality to see if I couldn’t help provide something that was less based on individual experiential reports and more on collective patterns…. 

    So bearing in mind this was the work of a couple hours and there is a LOT of work here and this is not my field so there are undoubtably people far better informed here’s what I found (Also apologies for length… I could edit to shorten it but I have already spent way more time than I should on this given what I was meant to get done today):

    <>I. Romantic and Sexual attraction - Motivation circuits that produce emotion rather than emotions themselves

    First point, as suspected there is a lot of overlap in the actual emotional/feeling component of all of these things! BUT what has emerged in all of the literature I looked at is that the primary difference is that the romantic vs sexual attraction scales appear to be (as described in Fischer et al, 2002):

    a)   <>   Consist of “at least three interrelated, yet distinct, emotion-motivation systems for mating, reproduction, and parenting: the sex drive, romantic attraction, and male-female attachment”

    b)   <>   Associated with different brain chemistry and activation changes “Lust, attraction, and attachment are not only associated with different neurotransmitters and/or hormones; these emotion-motivation systems are also associated with different behavioral repertoires”

    c)   <>   While these systems often act in concert with eachother and other bodily systems “they can also act independently of one another […] The independence of these three emotion-motivation systems is also observable in humans”

    Some useful definitions from Fischer et al. (2002):

    <>Emotion-motivation circuits “basic emotions arise from distinct circuits (or systems) of neural activity; that humans share several of these primary emotion-motivation circuits with other mammals; and that these brain systems evolved to direct behaviour.

    <>Sex drive (libido or lust) “characterized by craving for sexual gratification and it is associated primarily with the estrogens and androgens.” It motivates “individuals to seek sexual union with any appropriate member of the species”

    <>The attraction system (romantic attraction/infatuation) – “characterized by increased energy and focused attention on a preferred mating partner. In humans, the attraction system […] is also characterized by feelings of exhilaration, “intrusive thinking” about the love object and a craving for emotional union […] some evidence that this affective state is primarily associated with elevated levels of central dopamine and norepinephrine and decreased levels of central serotonin.” It motivates, to paraphrase, the selection of people among potential partners or suitors

    <>The attachment system (the paper used male-female attachment which is reaaally unnecessarily heteronormative term considering the definition, and most other sources just used “attachment”) - “characterized in birds and mammals by mutual territory defense and/or nest building, mutual feeding and grooming, the maintenance of close proximity, separation anxiety, shared parental chores and other affiliative behaviours”. It motivates long term sticking together/attachment and sharing of responsibilities.

    Fischer et al (2002) were focused on the partnering/romantic/mating systems but they discuss an interesting observation that is pertinent to the question of whether friendship acts differently/on a different system than the others:

    “Bartels and Zeki (2000) examined brain activity (using fMRI brain scanning) in 17 participants who reported being deeply in love. During the procedure, these participants viewed photographs of their partners and photographs of three friends. Bartels and Zeki reported that neural activity was restricted to foci in the medial insula, the anterior cingulate cortex, the head of the caudate nucleus, and the putamen. Deactivations occurred in the posterior cingulate gyrus and in the amygdala, as well as in the right prefrontal, parietal, and middle temporal cortices. It was concluded that “a unique network of areas are responsible for evoking this affective state” (Bartels & Zeki, 2000). This conclusion is consistent with our hypothesis that romantic love is associated with a discrete constellation of neural correlates and distinct from the neural systems associated with the other primary mating emotion–motivation systems: lust and attachment.”

    It was also importantly noted by Langeslag & van Strien (2016), that the reason it is often important to view these as emotional-motivation rather than emotions in and of themselves is that they evoke emotion rather than are the emotion itself (hence why they can produce the same feelings they just do it in different ways and motivate different pieces of the behaviour associated with those feeling:

    “love is sometimes considered a motivation (or drive) rather than an emotion [24]. One reason why love would not be an emotion is that it elicits different emotions depending on the situation. Reciprocated love, for example, may elicit the emotion euphoria, while unreciprocated love may elicit the emotion sadness.”

    I feel like it is this particular distinction that is WHY it is so difficult to actually articulate and understand the differences between these and how they interact by approaching it through our own individual experiential lenses! Because the same feelings and emotions can absolutely arise from all of these circuits AND our many other emotion-motivation circuits!

    <>II. Romantic Relationships – What Characterises Romantic? and the difference/relationship between Infatuation and Attachment

    Langeslag & van Strien (2016) who were studying ways in which we can and do regulate love and our feelings surrounding vs how much it is out of our control, had this to say about how the 2 pieces of the romantic component differ and tend to change in prominence given time in relationship:

    In this study, two types of love feelings are considered: infatuation and attachment. Infatuation is the overwhelming, amorous feeling for one individual, and is similar to the concepts ‘passion’ or ‘infatuated love’ [10], ‘romantic love’ [11], ‘passionate love’ [12], and ‘attraction’ [13]. Attachment, on the other hand, is the comforting feeling of emotional bonding with another individual, and is similar to the concepts ‘intimacy’ with ‘decision/commitment’ [10], and ‘companionate love’ [10–12].

    “Infatuation is typically most intense at the early stages of love after which it decreases relatively quickly [13–15] and attachment takes some time to develop [13–15] after which it decreases over the course of decades [16]. The decrease of infatuation and attachment over time threatens the stability of romantic relationships. Indeed, falling out of love is the primary reason for divorce [17].”

    As part of their study Langeslag & van Strien (2016) used two different scales to asses the different feelings of Infatuation and Attachment: The Passionate Love Scale (PLS) and Infatuation Attachment Scales (IAS). And honestly, these are much more rigorous and probably define things way, way better than I ever could!

    The 20 question IAS that came out of the research of and was proposed by Langeslag, Muris, & Franken (2013):


    And the PLS‐R (Another measure of infatuation) from Hatfield E. (1998)

    1.       I would feel deep despair if ——— left me.

    2.       Sometimes I feel I can’t control my thoughts; they are obsessively focused on ———.

    3.       I feel happy when I am doing something to make ——— happy.

    4.       I would rather be with ——— than anybody else.

    5.       I’d get jealous if I thought ——— was falling in love with someone else.

    6.       I yearn to know all about ———.

    7.       I want ——— physically, emotionally and mentally.

    8.       I have an endless appetite for affection from ———.

    9.       For me, ——— is the perfect romantic partner.

    10.    I sense my body responding when ——— touches me.

    11.    ——— always seems to be on my mind.

    12.    I want ——— to know me, my thoughts, my fears and my hopes.

    13.    I eagerly look for signs indicating ——— ’s desire for me.

    14.    I possess a powerful attraction for ———.

    15.    I get extremely depressed when things don’t go right in my relationship with ———.

    Langeslag et al. (2013) note that the score on the infatuation scale decreases with reported love/relationship duration AND attachment scores. And the decrease is related more to the increase in attachment vs the objective time spent in the relationship. Consistent with the experiential reporting that infatuation diminishes over time while attachment increases.  Additionally, infatuation was often highest in individuals not in relationships with the subject of their infatuation or at the very inception of a relationship. As an interesting aside (or at least I found it very interesting!) they also noticed that higher score on infatuation correlated with more negative affect (attributing this to increased stress associated with this state) and attachment was correlated with more positive affect ( attributing this to a calming effect associated with this state). Which is consistent with the interpretation that infatuation is about selecting a partner while attachment is about settling in together and supporting one another.

    <>III. Asexuality and its relationship to Infatuation and Attachment

    From a paper with a different focus than these others, i.e. specific focus on asexuality Zheng & Su (2018)

    “Asexuality is the absence of sexual attraction, but not the absence of romantic attraction or affection (Bogaert, 2006, 2015). In general, sexual attraction refers to erotic and sensual allure, while romantic attraction is the feeling of infatuation or emotional attachment (Bogaert, 2012b; Diamond, 2003). It was believed that one form of attraction may reflect or imply another; however, evidence suggests that romantic orientation is not always consistent with the sexual orientation (Diamond, 2003; Diamond & Fagundes, 2008). Furthermore, Diamond has explored this distinction from the viewpoint of developmental psychology and indicated that the process of sexual attraction might correspond to a phylogenetically older system in the human brain, while the process of romantic attraction might relate to a newer system developed after social contact with parents. Evidence from many empirical studies has confirmed this.

    The paper emphasized how varied the responses were regarding sexual experience, sexual desire/attraction, and romantic desire/attraction and that the data suggested several different subsets of experience within asexuality.

    (random personal note, this lines up very well with how Mr Accretionist describes himself, well he prefers just queer because it’s complicated, but when he’s described it in these terms he’s used mostly biromantic with only a minor bisexual component, he’s had many experiences of the infatuation side with multiple genders but the sexual attraction mostly with women).

    <>IV. Friendship vs. Romance

    It was much easier to find research regarding the above three motivation circuits than it was to find comparisons and descriptions of friendship in this context. But I did find some!

    So first Yamaguchi et al. (2015) looked at the ways we signal commitment in friendship and romantic relationships using two populations one from Japan and one from the US. And again in something that is consistent with how we were reporting that in friendship vs partnered relationships we often had similar/exact same activity engagements they found that “the same types of pro-relationship acts […] were used to communicate commitment to one’s partner in both types of relationship”. The primary difference that they found was that absence of “situational appropriate commitment signals (e.g., forgetting a special occasion) was substantially more damaging to romantic relationships than to friendship. Suggesting that one of the statistical differences between romantic relationships and friendship ones may be the relative importance of repeated attachment signaling in order to maintain said attachment.

    VanderDrift et al. (2016) examined friendship and romance from a need-fulfillment perspective and part of their central thesis is that the overlap of friendship and romantic relationships is large, with most romantic relationships having some component of friendship inherent. And that both friendships and romantic relationships work together to fulfil various needs, with different individuals more suited to filling some needs than others. They define friendship as “characterized by the importance of affection, intimacy, relatable alliance, and instrumental and emotional support (Berndt, 2002). As such, terms including ‘intimacy’ and ‘companionship’ are considered synonymously with ‘friendship’”. And the needs they describe include “companionate needs, sexual needs, needs for security and caregiving, and self-focused needs such as self-improvement and self-expansion”.

    Their work, along with earlier work found that most of their study participants rated companionate features of love as more central to love than passionate features of love and additionally that those who view friendship needs as important/ and rate the fulfullment of their friendship needs in their romantic relationships had better longer-term relationship outcomes.

    They went as far as to assert: Romantic relationships are, at their core, friendships.”

    VanderDrift et al. (2016) didn’t examine their findings with regards to attachment/infatuation scales but my suspicion from the descriptions in their paper is that if you were to use that scale to assess friendships you would find a lot of correlative indicators that match people’s romantic scores as well. As in I wonder if friendship operates on the attachment circuit and/or one very similar! Hence the difficulty in separating the two in a consistent way?

    One thing to note is that in a few studies I skimmed that had considerably less relevance overall to this particular question was that one difference found frequently between friendships and romantic relationships was what I would boil down to “pickiness” (i.e. “Specifically, participants preferred (and felt that it was more important to obtain) higher levels of many desirable characteristics - including physical attractiveness, social status attributes, and disposition or personality traits (e.g., warmth, expressiveness, humor, intelligence) - in a romantic/sexual partner than in a friend.” Sprecher & Regan, 2002).

    <>V. So what is romance anyway and is there a meaningful distinction from friendship?

    <>Verdict: Maybe? Or rather it looks like yes but the differences are probably smaller the further from peak infatuation period you get? Listen I’m not an expert here and I don’t have time for a full deep literature dive but basically….

    So I’d postulate from all of this that it seems likely that the attachment circuti is shared between friendship and romantic relationships (or at least that there is a similar thing going on). That romantic relationships become more solely friend-like over time with a tendency towards increased attachment and decreased infatuation. And the differences that I can tease out from these sources (there may be more but I’m using only the sources I’ve found thus far) may be that romantic relationships are ones where 1) the inception of the romance is associated with infatuation; 2) Are selected more on the basis of those infatuation-circuit-related factors than our friendships; and maybe even 3) where commitment signalling is expected at a higher importance/rate for the maintenance of said relationships.

    Beyond that I found very little comparison of friendship/romance directly… though I wouldn’t be surprised if a deeper dive might actually find you better resources… but I have to stop myself somewhere because I really shouldn’t have even spent all this time on this much of it XD… but I suppose to end I might return to Fisher et al. (2002) who during their work attempting to define “the brain systems of Lust, Romantic Attraction and Attachment” identified 13 psychophysiological characteristics commonly associated with romantic attraction and correlate with specific changes in brain chemistry… most of these are similar to those used in the IAS scale:

  • Feeling that their beloved is “unique” and increased focused attention on them
  • Focus on the positive qualities and overlook/falsely appraise negative traits. Also focus on specific events, objects, phenomena they associate with the beloved
  • Host of labile psychophysical responses including: exhileration, euphoria, increased energy, sleeplessness, loss of appetite, trembling, a pounding heart, accelerated breathing. “many also report feeling anxiety or panic”
  • In times of adversity experience intensification of romantic attraction
  • “intrusive thinking” – thinking about their beloved obsessively
  • Many times show signs of emotional dependency on relationship (including possessiveness, jealousy, fear of rejection and/or separation anxiety)
  • Experience longing for emotional closeness with the beloved
  • Feel a powerful sense of empathy toward the beloved and a willingness to sacrifice for them
  • Reordering of daily priorities to accommodate/allow time etc. with the beloved
  • Sexual desire (often accompanied by possessiveness)
  • Craving of “emotional union” often takes precedence over desire for sexual union
  • Commonly report that passion/romantic attraction is involuntary and uncontrollable (though Langeslag & van Strien (2016) argue that the feeling of lack of control is, to a certain extent a false one)
  • An impermanence of this state unless physical or social barriers inhibit partners from seeing one another regularly (I assume that this basically means the waning of infatuation as discussed by Langeslag et al. (2013))
  • Anyhow… that’s the result of my… few hour literature dive… so… yeah! (Also if anyone is interested in a full-text version of any of the references below - or literally any others you are interested in - let me know and I can get them to you. Heck yeah institutional access, babey!)


    Mana Yamaguchi, Adam Smith, Yohsuke Ohtsubo; 2015; Commitment signals in friendship and romantic relationships; Evolution and Human Behavior; Volume 36, Issue 6, Pages 467-474, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2015.05.002.

    Yu, Rongqin; Branje, Susan; Keijsers, Loes; Meeus, Wim H J.; 2014; Personality Effects on Romantic Relationship Quality through Friendship Quality: A Ten-Year Longitudinal Study in Youths; PLoS One; San Francisco Vol. 9, Iss. 9,  (Sep 2014): e102078. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102078

    Langeslag, Sandra & Muris, Peter & Franken, Ingmar. (2012). Measuring Romantic Love: Psychometric Properties of the Infatuation and Attachment Scales. Journal of sex research. 50. 10.1080/00224499.2012.714011.

    Helen E. Fisher, Ph.D.,1,5 Arthur Aron, Ph.D.,2 Debra Mashek, M.A.,2 Haifang Li, Ph.D.,3 and Lucy L. Brown, Ph.D.4, (2002), Defining the Brain Systems of Lust, Romantic Attraction, and Attachment; Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 31, No. 5, October 2002, pp. 413–419 (°C 2002)

    Zheng, L., Su, Y. Patterns of Asexuality in China: Sexual Activity, Sexual and Romantic Attraction, and Sexual Desire.Arch Sex Behav<> 47, 1265–1276 (2018). https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.1007/s10508-018-1158-y

    Hatfield E. The passionate love scale. In: Davis CM, Yarber WL, Bauserman R, Schreer G, Davis SL, editors. Handbook of Sexuality-Related Measures. Thousand Oaks Sage Publications; 1998. p. 449–51.

    Langeslag SJE, van Strien JW (2016) Regulation of Romantic Love Feelings: Preconceptions, Strategies, and Feasibility. PLoS ONE 11(8): e0161087. https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.1371/journal.pone.0161087

    Langeslag, Sandra & Muris, Peter & Franken, Ingmar. (2012). Measuring Romantic Love: Psychometric Properties of the Infatuation and Attachment Scales. Journal of sex research. 50. 10.1080/00224499.2012.714011.

    …holy shit, babe, this is goddamn glorious. Seriously.  Holy shit.

    Is anyone else like this? As a kid and even in adulthood in workplaces, I have always needed to doodle in order to maintain focus on and retain important information. My notebook margins are always filled with fun patterns :)

    This actually really common for students with ADHD and Autism. Kids who have a hard time focusing because of their disability will often wander off or get distracted by random things in the room. By doodling you keeping your eyes fixed on a point while listening. This decreases the likelihood of your brain spotting something and spiraling. Its also keeping two different parts of your brain busy. The visual and auditory as well as the part of your brain that processes information. This is how adhd and some autistic brains excel.

    Pakku apparently fucks so severely he convinced a woman that literally ran away to the other side of the world to get away from him that she wanted to get with him, on the other hand hes the guy that made her fuck off there in the first place,

    Gran Gran fucks so severely she left this guy like fifty years ago and he never got over her end of sentence

    Part of me wants the water tribe chief position to be hereditary just so its canon that Gran Gran either fucked the water tribe chieftain or was the water tribe chieftain or both,

    Part of me wants the air benders and the water tribe to be the only societies that arent hereditary monarchies, with Katara and Sokka going around the world as democratic citizens going damn bitch, y'all really live like this? And then go right ahead and start a coup.

    Katara and Sokka are also starting their democratic revolution, cause it's not like the earth kings talking to them and really he deserves to be deposed if theres this much poverty and also it takes several months to see him when you're The Fucking Avatar, and Azula rolls up with her coup and it's just the spiderman meme with both parties going "Youuuu!!!"

    Aang thinks he should get like a gold star for all this learning hes doing, other societies are confusing

    "So in the Northern Water Tribe is a..."

    "patriarchal hereditary monarchy, yes"

    "Right. That. Which means that the Mans heir is the next ruler no matter what."

    "Yes, his son"

    "that's dumb! How would he know that it was his kid?"

    "Uhhhh" *katara and sokka frantically try to think of a way of explaining monogamy to a boy who grew up in a poly normative communal raising society*

    "Aang, shouldn't you know all this? You have friends outside of the air nation. One of them becomes a king!?!?!!"

    "It never came up"

    Zuko meets Katara and Sokka post revolution and they immediately set about radicalizing him

    nana hardison would 100% accept hardison being in love with both parker and eliot

    she would adore them, okay?

    she’d take parker’s antics in stride and would be smitten with eliot’s “yes ma’am” southern charm end of story

    OP why did you hide these amazing tags???

    The only thing Nana disapproves of is that Hardison has not yet put a ring on it.

    Hardison tries to explain to Nana that poly marriages are not yet legal in the US. Nana is not the least bit impressed with this excuse.

    Nana cleans their room during their stay. Hardison lays down that night and hears a crinkle. There's a ring catalog under his pillow.

    Hardison comes down for breakfast. There’s a ring catalog in the seat of his chair. Eliot is at the stove making pancakes. Parker is outside with the foster sibs teaching them to hotwire cars playing games. Nana is sitting across from Alec’s seat, sipping her coffee and staring at him over the rim of her glasses. Nana doesn’t break her stare for even a split second to blink.

    “You gonna do some shopping today, Alec?”

    “Yes ma’am I am. I have a very important purchase to make. Gonna go get right on that.”

    So, mask-wearing. We are being asked to conform our behavior to guidelines in order to maximize public safety. Some people are acting like this is some horrible imposition on their carefree lifestyle.

    The thing is - we do that already. All the time. Constantly.

    Every time you stop at a red light. Show your ID to buy alcohol. Refrain from smoking in a non-smoking place. Take off your shoes at TSA. Use a designated driver. Regulate your speed on a highway.

    Even fundamental behaviors like respecting the social contract inherent in the exchange of money for goods or services are part of a collective agreement to conduct ourselves in a way that enables society to function.

    Mask wearing is no different than agreeing to drive on your designated side of the road. It’s just newer.


    Do you feel like its necessary to stop using dnd as a system given the recent allegations against WOTC? I have mixed feelings about it

    i have mixed feelings as well but a few days ago I found a thread on twitter that says a lot of things that have influenced my decision. <>the link is here!

    if you don’t end up reading that thread (i recommend you do but), because dnd, especially 5e addition is so popular and such a gateway game, people are going to be playing it regardless. DND 5E is the only system I play regularly enough to have any sort of comfort zone in and it fits the genre of the stories i like to tell/participate in (for the most part). 

    is the source material shitty and will i continue to speak up about my thoughts on it and elevate the more important voices of those who are directly impacted by the racism, stereotyping and insensitivity the books preach? <>yes.

    but for me, dnd is transformed at the hands of a willing dm, and a willing table. that’s why all of the campaigns i’ve played in and loved were homebrewed, even if they originally started as canon adventures. There will always be the Old Gen or classic Ignorant Dudebro shit side of dnd, but there can always be people heralding and moving towards a better version of the game, whether you’re playing at home, blogging online about your experience playing, or actively pursuing a career with wotc. 

    I think people are entitled to stop playing dnd because of any number of the allegations against wotc or even their own personal opinions. you can cater your rpg experience to your beliefs.

    will i stop playing or making homebrews for 5e? nah, if i can make any sort of impact in the community to change the way people think about the game and encourage them to innovate, i will and i’ll boost creators around me doing the same!

    that being said, two of the coolest things i’ve seen lately are

  • <>the ancestory and culture supplement<> — an alternative to traditional dnd race mechanics.
  • <>class modifier module— a system ascribing your asi to a character’s class instead of races being inherently smarter/dumber weaker/stronger than each other!
  • Supreme Court Lets Employers Opt Out of Birth Control Coverage

    The justices upheld regulations from the Trump administration that allowed employers with religious objections to decline to provide contraception coverage.

    As a consequence of the ruling, <>about 70,000 to 126,000 women could lose contraceptive coverage from their employers, according to government estimates.

    The vote was 7 to 2, with Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissenting.