i think its so interesting how didier parallels the institute. it was something i didn't really notice while reading, but it seems so obvious in hindsight! both didier and the institute show how those in power perceive those below them as expendable and replaceable (with didier it's social class and with the institute it's humanity as an inferior life form)

there's this repeated point didier will just replace anybody in his service because all he needs is the labor they provide/the function they fill in his life or in the chateau. (the doctor, emile, helene, etc.). they're not really people to him, and even if they are, they're all replacable. it was really haunting that emile wants to kill didier not just because of what's been done to him and the fact that didier will likely hunt him to the ends of the earth, but the knowledge that if didier fails to get emile, he'll simply find a replacement, subjecting another person to his twisted desire

and this directly parallels the way the institute treats its bodies and humans as a whole, just a vessel that serves a purpose. its bodies are valuable and a shame to lose, but an acceptable loss that it'll simply replace eventually. they're not autonomous beings but replaceable parts of itself.

additionally, the institute treats the loss of human knowledge/culture (as well as human life) as inconsequential as long as it allows them to carve out a niche. it's not really addressed, but given how much alternative medicine in our world is tied to distinct cultural practices (i.e. acupuncture), to get rid of those practitioners and then take what knowledge/information and fold that knowledge into the institute without preserving any of the culture behind it feels like such a violation. there's definitely some kind of colonial metaphor here that i'm too tired to fully explore. when i first read that detail it just felt like a fun worldbuilding tidbit but thinking about it more makes me incredibly sad about what it actually means for the settlements the institute infiltrates.

He tries to turn around and walk back into his office, but Leslie starts crying and saying Supportive Things about how proud she is to see him exploring his gender and immediately switches to they/them; she instructs Ben and Ann to do the same. Donna and Chris go for she/her, for different reasons.

Tom assures Ron that he will use only the slickest, coolest, dopest designer pronouns; he sweeps in the next day and announces that he's put together a powerpoint of the most stylish and fashionable neopronouns to come out of Milan this season. The powerpoint includes the scarf, cologne and sunglasses that pair best with each option. Jerry is the only one to attend this presentation, which leaves him even more Big Confused about the whole thing than he already was. In Jerry's efforts to clumsily be an ally, he keeps accidentally "misgendering" Ron four different times in four different ways in every interaction and apologizing elaborately for every single mistake, thereby inadvertently doing the best job out of any of them at fulfilling the brief.

Andy does not know what a pronoun is, but in the spirit of himbo helpfulness, he's made a list of Words that he knows Ron likes, such as "sandwich", "woodworking", and "bacon". (Ron snatches it, tears it up, throws it in the trash, and sets the trash basket on fire, and firmly instructs Andy to never again mention anything that Ron likes while inside a government building.)

Uhm.. Actually, you can be. There's a lot of people who are honest when answering that question. They just do it in ways that don't come across so upsetting or depressing.

Many people sugarcoat their answers to be more palatable for a greeting, or for a start of a conversation. It can also just be a polite way of giving others an out for a potential depressing conversation they may not want to be a part of.

These responses usually come in forms like, - "How are you?/How's it going?" - "Could be better." "It's definitely going." "I'm still alive." "I'm getting there." "New day, new problems." "Well, I'm still here." "Same old." "It's not all sunshine." "It's moving along". "It is what it is." "Not great but I'll survive." "Hoping tomorrow comes quickly." And many more responses like this. These are all ways of basically saying "Things are kinda/very shit at the moment for me". But they just don't go into detail about it. They are being honest, without the extra information.

If the other person doesn't want to go further into this then they may just responed with something like "I feel you", or "That's relatable", or "Yeh, that's life". Which are basically ways of saying "I acknowledge things aren't easy right now", without having to go into a conversation about it. Not everyone has the emotional energy to deal with conversations like that in that moment and that's okay.

However, people tend to also misunderstand what these greetings are for.

Like most of behaviours stored under the label of "good manners" it's a bid for positive connection. Like "hey fellow stranger, let's connect in this tiny field to confirm we're both safe:)" - it's an equivalent of animals scenting one another.

When someone says "How are you?" and you answer is "Good. How are you?" That's a little connection you two just made that makes the following interaction easier. It signals to both of you that the other person is safe to interact with.

When your answer to "How are you?" is one of the "Still alive" variety without spilling your guts at them, the other person can commiserate in the "Yeah tell me about it" way, and it's the same thing - it's safe to interact.