Juno

I’m a psychologist, and this blog is a space for psychological reflection, theory, and interpretation.

You are welcome to ask me any kinds of questions:

• About my speculative interpretations of Luigi — these are strictly theory-based reflections drawn from publicly available information, not clinical diagnoses or definitive statements about a real person.

• About psychological theory in general, so how the mind works.

• Whatever you want, there are no stupid questions. Have fun!

All content here should be understood as exploratory and theoretical, not as professional evaluation.

Please approach all content with critical thinking and awareness.

I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THIS, I'M LAUGHING SO HARD 🤣🤣🤣🤣

I partially agree with you.

Exactly. Great point

Acting as if you know someone's life and "predicting" the future using scraps of paper is mental illness and a scam

First of all, mental illness is a completely different topic. We don’t need to bring it into every discussion!

As I’ve said before, people have a natural need to believe in something. By that logic, you could make the exact same argument about religion. I don’t judge people who are religious, nor do I judge people who believe in tarot or other practices.

As I wrote before, the difference between a charlatan and an honest practitioner is that: an honest person will tell you that tarot, astrology, etc are interpretations, not objective facts, and that they cannot predict the future with certainty.

“Women inhabit a different social universe.

Follow

This is why, when they enter male spaces, they assume they are being targeted for their sex. They simply are unable to grasp what the standard male experience in those spaces is like.

The female of the human species has a life experience that is not only unique among humans, but unique among females. It is a privilege that is unknown elsewhere in nature.

When a female human looks as if she in danger, or suffering, or being treated unfairly, other humans, both male and female, care about this even if they are not mates or relatives.

This is not typical. Females of other species typically do not experience this. Male humans do not typically experience this, and when they do, it's culturally trained in.

Altruism towards human females is genetic.

Why?

Because the human reproductive cycle is uniquely fragile. Giant brains require early development of giant heads, which means female humans have to evolve to deliver giant heads, and to deliver them early, while they can still pass through the pelvic girdle.

This means that not only do women have to have inefficiently wide hips, they also have to devote much of their development to a complex and fragile reproductive system.

And it gets worse. Infants, being born prematurely compared to other species, are extremely fragile and develop extremely slowly. Infant horses can run hours after being born. Infant humans can't even hold their own heads up.

Which makes women even more vulnerable. After all, if you're carrying a precious and delicate Faberge egg around, inside or outside your body, you effectively ARE that egg... because if you are handled roughly, it will break.

Obviously, this heavy biological price is worth it to the species, because it has allowed us to be smart enough to dominate the planet, but it has caused humanity to evolve with an Achilles heel... the fragility, and the indispensability, of women.

So how does a species like that survive under primitive conditions?

Simple. Evolve a genetic imperative... protect the women.

In no other species is this imperative so strong.

Tomcats don't protect and care for female cats. Why would they? Female cats can run and fight and hunt, even when pregnant, and their kittens can be left alone for hours at a time in hidden places.

This basic instinct to defend the Achilles heel of the species is so powerful that it impacts and shapes our politics and social culture to this day.

That is why men want male spaces. Because when women are present, they must always be protected, even when that interferes with the mission, or the social culture of the space.

Going on a 20-mile hike? Take women along, and it might suddenly become a 10-mile hike, or a 5-mile hike, because one of them got tired.

Building something? All work must stop if a woman becomes upset.

Playing a team sport? Well, you get the idea.

You have to understand that this behavior is compulsive. Even the precise same men who resent women's presence changing the space, will still feel compelled to protect women, and to change the space to protect women, even if they passive-aggressive lash out at those women later for invoking that instinct.

In other words, male spaces are spaces where men can just be people and not have to worry about being a stranger's guardian angel.

The reason that online male spaces have a higher frequency of this sort of lashing out at women is that men can't SEE the woman there, so the protective instinct is less likely to trigger.

There is a corresponding instinct on the part of women... to seek out, gravitate to, and demand this kind of behavior.

So the answer to "Juliebear"s question is simple.

1. Yes, men talk to each other like that.

This is not a special trait of men. It is the universal standard for strangers in competition, a standard from which only women are exempt.

2. No, we don't like it.

3. So what?

We have to put up with it anyway, because it trains us to be tough and not let things bother us. Because that's who we have to be for the sake of women.

If we are delicate and sensitive and cry, literally or metaphorically, not only can we not protect women when they actually need, or think they need, protecting, we would also not have descendants.

Because crying men give women the ick.

4. No, you are not different.

You can virtue-signal all you want by saying men should be protected, too, but that has about as much weight as a puff of warm hydrogen.

If and when a man elbows you aside to get to the lifeboat, or cries because someone said something mean and his feelings are hurt, you will find out just precisely how not-different you are.

5. This is the social order that keeps our species going.

Don't mess with it, or birth rates will plummet. Kinda like we see happening all around us right now.”

Thank u so much for sending this!! 🤍

“When a female human looks as if she is in danger, or suffering, or being treated unfairly, other humans, both male and female, care about this even if they are not mates or relatives.” That’s not exactly true. This can happen when any human being, regardless of sex, appears to be in danger. Many people feel the urge to help or protect someone in that situation. But that isn’t something determined by biology or evolution alone — it’s largely shaped by living in a society. Human societies have developed social norms and prosocial behaviors that encourage helping others. In fact, as societies have become increasingly individualistic, these behaviors seem to have become less common. You often hear people say things like, “Nobody cares about anyone anymore,” or “If someone collapses in the street, no one helps them.”

“This is not typical. Females of other species typically do not experience this. Male humans do not typically experience this, and when they do, it’s culturally trained in.” Ironically, this sentence already admits that culture plays a role. But it’s also incorrect to claim that similar behaviors don’t exist in other species. Several primate species display prosocial behaviors — helping others without an immediate personal benefit. Reciprocal aid, consolation, and cooperation have all been documented in non-human primates.

“Altruism towards human females is genetic.” There is no such thing as an “altruism gene.” So this statement is simply false.

The following points about pregnancy and childbirth are generally accurate, but the conclusions drawn from them are not. There is no evidence that having a biologically demanding pregnancy or childbirth somehow means women are inherently fragile individuals. That’s a logical fallacy.

The author then asks how humans survived in prehistoric times despite this supposed “fragility,” and concludes that the answer is that men protected women.

There is no universal “primitive instinct” to protect women. If there were, phenomena such as sexual violence, domestic abuse, abandoned mothers, or patriarchal systems would never have existed. (And, as a side note, humans rely on learned behaviors and motivational drives rather than fixed instincts — but that’s a much bigger discussion)

“That is why men want male spaces. Because when women are present, they must always be protected, even when that interferes with the mission, or the social culture of the space.” I’ve never seen men interrupt what they’re doing just to “protect” women. And protect them from whom, exactly? We haven’t been living among tigers for a very long time.

“Going on a 20-mile hike? Take women along, and it might suddenly become a 10-mile hike, or a 5-mile hike, because one of them got tired.” LOL this has been debunked countless times. It depends on fitness and endurance, not sex. If I’m well trained and I go hiking with a man who’s never exercised a day in his life and has very little muscle mass, chances are I’m the one with greater endurance. That’s pretty obvious.

“Building something? All work must stop if a woman becomes upset.” LOL honestly, this reads like someone who’s never actually met a woman irl

“In other words, male spaces are spaces where men can just be people and not have to worry about being a stranger’s guardian angel.” LMAO once again, let’s all guess together: who exactly are these heroic men supposedly protecting women from… if not other men?

I genuinely started reading this intending to give it a serious critique, but I didn’t expect it to be this bad. It somehow kept getting worse. It honestly reads like rage bait or trolling.

“Because crying men give women the ick.” Bro, I swear, I love seeing men cry and be emotionally open.

And finally, birth rates are definitely not declining because of this nonsense!!

Wow. I honestly don’t know whether to call this misogyny or just an incredibly ignorant set of takes, but it was genuinely difficult to finish reading.

Of course, we’ll probably never know the exact reason why he chose to reblog this. I do think it makes more sense if we consider the period of his life he was reportedly going through at the time. Unfortunately, when some people — especially young men — go through difficult periods, they sometimes gravitate toward overly simplistic explanations because those explanations provide a sense of certainty or purpose.

I’m not saying this to excuse him. I’m saying it because I’d rather try to understand what may have been happening than settle for simplistic explanations.

This happens in general, not just in this community. People have a natural need to feel like they have some control over their lives, to know how things will turn out or to understand exactly what happened in a particular situation.

The reality is that there are some things we simply can’t know, and no one can give us definitive answers.

My two cents:

Luigi was in a dark place. He could not share with people in his life and might have possibly felt that they cannot understand him. He was looking for connections online. In a way, all of us feel wanted by somebody, more so when we're in a dark place, such as what Luigi was in.

At this juncture, even the slightest hint of "they're not wanted" makes one uncomfortable. It's like - "I already feel like I'm not doing anything, and now I'm not wanted?" - even if whatever the case in point did not specifically refer to them, but was rather a generalization. I think this is what led to him retweeting that tweet on how sad it is that men are not seen as wanted anymore.

I don't think he was deeply engaging in gender war here. It was probably from a private place within his mind where he was trying to figure out where he fit and felt wanted for something important.

Also, reg that repost on Achilles heel, if I'm not wrong, it no longer shows up on his a/c and he supposedly undid the retweet? So not sure how that can be used to say he's misogynistic.

Reg the Jash Dholani's book, I cannot comment because I haven't read the book but I think Luigi was interested in it because it spoke of civilization and civilizational consciousness (based on descriptions of it on SM). Luigi could've just read it for that purpose and ignored the misogyny part. We can't always stop reading something because of a few specific things. I'm not condoning misogyny, it's unacceptable. It's more like us reading George Orwell knowing he was accused of SA. I love the book Sapiens but hate the zionism of its writer Harari. I'm perhaps projecting here but I'm giving the benefit of doubt that this could be the case.

Thanks for your perspective! 🤍 (sorry for the delayed reply)

If you’re asking me this, I’m assuming you already have an ADHD diagnosis. If that’s the case, you probably know that the biggest challenge is usually getting started, rather than the task itself or a lack of motivation.

I would tell you:

• Stop waiting to feel motivated. This is probably one of the most helpful pieces of advice. If you know you need to do something, try to start before you give yourself time to overthink it. Once you’ve begun, it’s often much easier to keep going. It’s similar to standing on a high diving board: if you spend too long thinking about it, you’ll hesitate. If you jump, your body already knows how to swim. The same principle applies here: you start → your brain engages with the task → motivation follows. That’s why waiting to feel motivated first usually doesn’t work.

• Break the task into very small steps instead of seeing it as one huge project. And I really mean small. For example: Step 1: open the book. Step 2: find the page I need. It may sound a little silly, but those tiny steps make the task feel much more manageable to your brain.

• Don’t focus on the finish line. If you’re studying for an exam, don’t think, “I have to master this entire textbook.” Instead, think, “Today I’m going to study these pages for a couple of hours and understand this section well.” Focusing only on today’s goal makes the task much less overwhelming.

• Since you mentioned fear, try not to let your diagnosis define your expectations of yourself. Thoughts like “what if I’m not capable?” make it even harder to get started.

• Don’t expect to understand everything perfectly on the first try. It’s completely normal not to grasp a topic immediately. That is for everyone — not just people with ADHD.

• Use external supports to help you stay on track. Checklists, timers, sticky notes, reminders, whatever works best for you. The important thing is to adapt the tools to the task you’re trying to accomplish.

• A simple but important tip: reduce distractions as much as you can. The fewer competing stimuli around you, the easier it is to stay engaged with the task.

• Try to approach what you’re doing with curiosity rather than obligation. This isn’t just helpful for ADHD — it helps almost everyone. Seeing a task as something interesting instead of something you have to do can make studying or working feel much less exhausting.

Those are the first strategies that come to mind!

Anon this is already the accepted norm, lol.

Me too. I’m not a fan of the writer but I understand donating to an author not trying to buy 400 copies. Thank Jesus the bank thought it was spam and he didn’t waste his money

It's about parasocial behaviors, I think that we are all parasocial to different levels, but when it reaches extremes like invading privacy of the target, going too far and acting as if anyone around the person is a danger and else, how can we help those people to "retrograde" their level of parasocial ? Is there anything to know about parasocial behaviors on a psychological level ? I have no clue on how to treat this subject because sometimes I see people putting their object of desire into real danger (mostly when it's towards real humans), so safety is threatened and else and I don't know if we can do anything about it ?

Thank you in advance, wishing you the best 🫶🏻🫶🏻🫶🏻

Hi! 🤍 First of all, thank you for trusting me with this question!

I think you’re right when you say that, to some extent, most of us experience mild and relatively harmless forms of parasocial behavior. It’s a natural consequence of human curiosity — we’re interested in learning more about other people, especially those we find fascinating. The real issue isn’t whether parasociality exists, but the degree to which it develops.

As you pointed out, it becomes a serious problem when it turns into invasive behavior or violations of someone’s privacy. First and foremost, it’s harmful for the people involved( Luigi, of course, but also his family, friends, exes, and so on). At best, it can make someone feel like they’re constantly being watched; at worst, it becomes harassment, for example when people start messaging them directly.

But it’s also harmful for the person engaging in those behaviors. They’re so emotionally invested in the object of their attachment (which you described very accurately) that they stop fully living their own life. They become less present with themselves and with the people who actually know and care about them, and they end up experiencing Luigi’s situation with an overwhelming level of anxiety and emotional involvement.

As for the psychological mechanisms behind this, I’ll link a few posts where I talk about them in more detail if you’d like to take a look:

Briefly, though, several different mechanisms interact with one another:

• The illusion of reciprocity. This often happens with influencers who post stories every day. Our brains begin to feel as though we know them. It’s not because we’re gullible — it’s because, for thousands of years, the faces we saw every day belonged to people we actually knew. When someone regularly shares stories about their life, thoughts, and experiences, our brains naturally create the illusion that they’re as familiar to us as a neighbor. In Luigi’s case, I think the letters — where he shared pieces of his life and parts of himself — may have contributed to that feeling for some people.

• The familiarity effect. The more often we see someone’s face, the more familiar they feel, and familiarity is often mistaken for genuine knowledge. His constant media exposure likely reinforced this. Once the trials are over and people stop hearing about him every day, these parasocial feelings will probably fade naturally.

• Symbolic meaning. For some people, Luigi has become a symbol onto which they project their own struggles, political beliefs, anger toward society, etc. That symbolic role strengthens the feeling of having a personal connection with him.

• Identification and projection, which are closely related to the previous point. Some people want to be like him or see him as an inspiration. Projection is also a natural consequence of knowing very little about someone: when information is missing, our minds fill in the gaps with interpretations shaped by our own expectations, experiences, and inner world.

• The need to belong. Parasocial relationships are often reinforced by fandoms and online communities, where people find a sense of belonging through their shared interest in the same person.

• Intermittent reinforcement. For example, receiving a “like” from your favorite creator can strengthen the illusion of having a real relationship with them. As I mentioned in one of the posts I linked, perhaps receiving a reply from Luigi created that same illusion for some people, that there was a personal bond.

How can we help people who are experiencing this?

It’s very difficult because, ultimately, these are people we only know online. The healthiest approach is to encourage them to become more engaged with their own lives — building routines around work/school, spending time with friends and family, investing in hobbies, and so on. Even if they remain active online, it’s important that they hold on to their own sense of identity and remember that Luigi — and everyone around him — is just an ordinary person with a life, joys, struggles, and relationships of his own. And most importantly, they’re still strangers.

The constant search for new photos, updates, or personal information tends to reinforce itself, almost like a behavioral addiction. That’s why it can be very difficult, at first, to step away from the idealization and from constantly checking social media dedicated to him. But creating that distance is an important step.

I think it’s really kind of you to be concerned and to want to help people who are struggling with this. The reality, though, is that it’s incredibly difficult because we’re “outsiders” — we’re not part of their personal lives. The best thing we can probably do is explain the psychological mechanisms involved and give people tools they can use to gradually create a healthier distance.

Yeah. I’m sure they are processing how they feel in different ways not stalking people and making comments about their every move.

Aww, that's honestly so kind of you to say.🥰

And thank you, that's really thoughtful of you to even offer.

I'd genuinely be happy to do it! I'm just a little busy at the moment, so l'd probably be able to sit down with it properly sometime next week🤓.

Also, would you prefer me to send it through anon again, or would you like me to message you when I've got the time? Whatever you're most comfortable with - I’m happy either way.🫶

I think it would be better if you messaged me because I’m afraid your ask will get buried in my inbox! 😅

Take your time, there’s absolutely no rush! Honestly, I’ve been struggling to keep up with Tumblr lately because I’ve been really busy, so take your time!

While I’m at it, I also want to say this to everyone who’s still waiting for a reply (especially those who sent me longer or more complex asks): I’m not ignoring you. I promise I’ll get to everyone eventually. I just want to make sure I have enough time to give you thoughtful and accurate responses 🫶🏻

True lol! To be honest, I didn't get why he wanted to buy all those copies. It could have been the best book in the world, but what are you supposed to do with them?