A little less conversation... A little more touch me.

So my actual TEXTBOOK admitted that it was biased and teaching these disorders based on opinion and not up to date research. And, as described above, the section on ODD was basically just, “these are bad kids. We will not look into why or how or what comorbidities exist and we will also not be exploring the possibility of ODD really being a manifestation of trauma/undiagnosed adhd/autism/pathological demand avoidance/persistent drive for autonomy. We will however be mostly focusing on how annoying these kids are to their parents and teachers ✨️”

It’s fucking crazy. “Yeah we know lots of people with autism struggle to follow demands. They may either ignore/not register demands or have meltdowns when demands are placed. They may engage in physical aggression, verbal aggression, and property desctruction when directed to complete tasks or be exposed to uncomfortable sensory input. They may need to know the why behind demands and consequently argue with authority figures. They may be easily upset by sensory input or social interactions and have emotional outbursts when pushed beyond their limits. Some children with autism seek attention and may engage in maladaptive behaviors to elicit the attention of peers and caregivers if positive attention is not given freely/if they are ignored when behaving appropriately. All of these are symptoms of their underlying neurological differences and should be met with compassion and understanding. They are not bad children. Their brains process information differently and therefore they have executive functioning, sensory processing, and emotional regulation challenges that cause these behaviors.

How would you even measure that?

Things adults wrongly identify as arguing:

Asking for clarification

Asking any kind of question

defending yourself

answering a question teh adult has just asked you

breathing

Existing

Oh, also:

Race and the Mental Representation of Individuals Diagnosed with Oppositional Defiant Disorder: Implications for Diagnosis

Pathologizes problems with authority to dismiss them as irrational.

Zionism is simply the belief that Jewish people get to live in Israel, a land that they are indigenous to. Zionists have a diversity of thought when it comes to how to accomplish this goal, many are appalled at the recent actions of the Israeli government, but they all agree that Jews deserve to live in their ancestral homeland.

At least 80% of Jews identify as Zionist, and antizionist movements have stoked intense antisemitism accross the world. I do believe one can criticise Israel without being antisemitic, but that requires a level of nuance that the majority of antizionists are not interested in undertaking. As it stands, the antizionist movement is a lot of people being ok marching with nazis.

There are real tragedies happening in Gaza, but labelling it a "genocide" (it isn't) or denying Israel's right to defend itself against a terrorist organization (look up reports of how Hamas "helps" palestinians) doesn't actually move us towards peace, it just means you have a group of people you feel justified in hating.

I generally don't send these, and have lost many beloved blogs to the scourge of antisemitism under the guise of antizionism, but I'm hoping that you're willing to listen and reflect on how you approach Jews and zionism.

Unfortunately, if you say that three times in the mirror, a horde of eugenicists will appear screaming about "what about the right to an abortion!!!". That is so far from the context of what we are saying, because of course it is. Because y'all would rather look like you're doing the right thing than ACTUALLY do the right thing, and want to paint marginalized people as the bad guys.

Do not try for kids in the first place if you don't want a disabled or neurodivergent kid.

[Plaintext: Do not try for kids in the first place if you don't want a disabled or neurodivergent kid.]

~ Hibaya O, Mav

(Previous pinned because we think this one will chase more nasties away at the moment)

Astrologers helped design the study

No one did better than random chance, even though they only included people in the study who are experienced with astrology and stated that they expect themselves to do better than random chance

They gave every astrologer a set of 50 things about a person and 5 birth charts to choose from. They weren’t even coming up with the chart themselves!

After taking the test, most thought they nailed it. Zero out of 152 did better than 5 out of 12. None nailed it

Astrologers who rated themselves highly experienced (“world class experts”) did the same or worse as those who said they have limited experience. Both performed the same as random chance