Sometimes when I go hundreds pages deep into people’s Tumblr archives, I find really funny posts and I weigh the pros and cons of liking/reblogging them.
Pros: I’ll have access to them later because they’re fucking hilarious
Cons: They might think I’m creepy. Despite the fact that it’s public and on the Internet, it is not socially acceptable to let anyone know the extent that you creeped their archives.
I hereby extend blanket permission for anyone to creep on my archive, and to like and reblog posts from it if they want to. It’s really quite flattering.
I notice this happening sometimes, and it always makes my day. Creep away!
also, you never know whether somebody is creeping your archive or whether they’re trying to get back to the last comment before a thread went sideways.
Also, they might be just scrolling through your tags and liking/reblogging old stuff because of that.
The risk of thromboembolism varies with different preparations; with second-generation pills (with an estrogen content less than 50μg), the risk of thromboembolism is small, with an incidence of approximately 15 per 100,000 users per year, compared with 5 per 100,000 per year among non-pregnant individuals not taking the pill, and 60 per 100,000 pregnancies.[89] In individuals using preparations containing third-generation progestogens (desogestrel or gestodene), the incidence of thromboembolism is approximately 25 per 100,000 users per year.[89] Also, the risk is greatest in subgroups with additional factors, such as smoking (which increases risk substantially) and long-continued use of the pill, especially in women over 35 years of age.[89]
So you hear this stuff and promptly forget about it, because everybody takes the pill and this hardly ever happens?
Well, six months ago it happened to me.
TLDR: This can actually happen and it’s serious, so get medical attention. For actual details see after the jump.
“The personal is political” was originally intended to mean that the oppression you experience as an individual is patterned – that there are structural patterns underlying your experience. It encouraged individuals who were experiencing oppressive situations – a woman abused by her husband or a worker exploited by her employer – to view these situations not as personal problems but as political problems that require coming to getting with others to address the issue in the public sphere.
It is no small irony that the phrase “the personal is political” is now often used to mean something opposite of the original meaning. While it once meant that personal problems are not really personal, but are structural problems that require collective action, now people use the phrase to advocate uncoordinated individual action (buying organic shampoo) as somehow constitution a political intervention.
Jonathan Matthew Smucket – Hegemony How-To. A roadmap for radicals.
i hate when the teacher’s like “write about a bad time in your life” like i ain’t tryna get a social worker up my ass, thanks tho fam
This ain’t no joke I had to write a essay about what your scared of so I did it (I was scared of growing up and where my life was going) it was great got a 100 but then I got sent to councilors office and was sent to therapy cause they thought I was suicidal and on the verge of breaking…Apparently they ment like spiders or some shit…
Also like, not everyone finds that at all useful or cathartic.
“Write about some difficulty you’ve experienced personally.” “Aight fam let me just break down into tears and skip the rest of my classes.”
Yes! I had a psych professor ask us to discuss outloud the hardest thing that ever happened to us literally two days ago and I said “you realize the position you’re putting us in? I feel obligated to lie to not only save my peers the awkwardness but also because I will find no relief in answering honestly but rather anxiety. The hardest thing in my life is having people repeatedly tell me I should find some sort of catharsis in reliving my trauma so someone else can feel pity for me!”
The whole class backed me up because they didn’t want to either! Those kind of exercises are only helpful for people who don’t have any real past/current issues– which is no one btw.
On par with this are those fucking self-assessments where they want to to be optimistic and positive about the future. You’re sitting there drowning in college stress and anxiety so bad you can’t look another human in the eye, fighting depression so that you can eventually achieve a piece of paper that might get you a better job if the economy doesn’t tank itself (guess what, it did), and the most optimistic thing you can think of is that the class ends in 20 minutes.
There’s a WIRED article that explains the history behind this practice.
Basically, this guy named Jeffrey Mitchell had a traumatic experience, then after months of PTSD, he told a confidant about the event that traumatized him. Retelling the event to a confidant was so cathartic for Mitchell that his PTSD went away after. He did a bunch of research to see if his personal experience of catharsis and relief could be replicated in other people suffering from PTSD. Years later he published a paper proposing a formalized psychiatric treatment revolving around this idea that expressing a traumatic experience helps relieve it. The paper was so influential that the whole psychiatric community adopted “critical incident stress debriefing” (CISD) as a standard treatment for PTSD.
Unfortunately … it’s bullshit.
Not only does the CISD treatment program Mitchell came up with not help the majority of patients who try it, but it actually makes PTSD worse in the majority of patients who try it.
The WIRED article explains why:
CISD misapprehends how memory works…. Once a memory is formed, we assume that it will stay the same. This, in fact, is why we trust our recollections. They feel like indelible portraits of the past.
None of this is true. In the past decade, scientists have come to realize that our memories are not inert packets of data and they don’t remain constant.
…the very act of remembering changes the memory itself. New research is showing that every time we recall an event, the structure of that memory in the brain is altered in light of the present moment, warped by our current feelings and knowledge.
Basically, Mitchell waited until he had some emotional distance before trying to recall the memory, and he had full control of the situation. It was fully his decision. Nobody was pressuring him to talk about it. So he felt safe. Thinking about the memory from a place of safety allowed his brain to re-contextualize the memory as harmless.
Conversely, pressuring a patient to recall a traumatic memory, particularly when it’s still fresh in their minds, makes the patient feel very unsafe. Recalling a bad memory in this unsafe context only serves to re-traumatize the patient.
Urocyon's Jaunts 2.0 
You must be logged in to post a comment.