Thursday, July 22, 2021

Quote of the Day

How could anyone find comfort in silence that could end without warning?

Becky Chambers, The Galaxy, And The Ground Within

Why tricksters rule

Loki as Other: Why Do Queer and Female Viewers Love the Trickster?

Yet despite offering more representation, the series appears to lack curiosity about the embodied experiences of gender-fluid, bisexual, and pansexual people. How does it feel to be genderfluid, and does Loki see himself that way? How does it feel to be attracted to more than one gender? What does Loki’s sexuality mean to him (and his “variants”)–is it a source of joy, a source of stress, a significant part of his life? These questions seem to be absent from the Loki series, with Loki’s occupation of other bodies used purely to further the plot, and his sexuality only acknowledged with the single coming-out line. Perhaps a story that explored these facets of Loki’s identity would devote more screentime to the experience of queerness, genderfluidity, or even atypical masculinity. Loki’s character speaks to many of us because he is othered, but I can’t help wondering: what would a series that centered Loki look like?

Everyone should love the trickster, in my opinion. And like everyone else, I hope season 2 of Loki has way more trickstery goodness than the last one did.


This could be my next attention sink

Palia: MMO Meets Farm/Life/Community Sim

It’s not out yet, but an MMO that encourages cooperation over ganking or insulting strangers is exactly what I am here for. It might not even have a combat system, and that makes me over the moon happy.


Writing resources about diversity win all the things

My previous resource: Writing the Other

My new one I just found out about: Writing With Color

Both make me happy and more confident about representing awesomely.


Capital-s Self

I’m looking up some resources for a friend about the Jungian concept of ‘Self’, and I’m having a hard time finding things that aren’t a Jungian word salad. Here are some of the best, so I don’t have to try to find them again:

The Highly Sensitive Person and the Numinous

The objective reality of what is experienced as numinous is an issue that Corbett and Jung, as psychologists, not theologians, prefer to side step. They would leave that question up to theologians, and perhaps to each of us.

But I think it is important to note that our interpretation of our experience or that of others has enormous effects. If what’s numinous were “objective,” then it seems that it would be true, a fact, God’s truth in this case, and it would seem that everyone ought to believe it, which leads to religious wars as well as people trying to believe in something they have heard about but never personally experienced, because the one who had the experience says it is Truth. On the other hand, if it is seen as a purely subjective, personal experience, that is often taken to mean, as I was saying, that the experience is numinous, but its source is not. The experience is only a psychological instinct, capacity, or tendency to see or believe that there is something real out there.

Elaine N. Aron, Ph.D.

The Self (Jung’s Definition)

The Jungian Model of the Psyche

Then there’s also this great graphic on a tepid article, so I’ll just include the graphic:

Thanks Hugo Lin!

And then this is also a helpful image:

Not sure where this came from.

It’s odd, re-looking these concepts up. They were so clear to me while I was in grad school, and now I have these ideas that have lingered and morphed and evolved in my brain that have become intrinsic parts of my worldview that are now hard to enunciate. In going back over some of my grad school materials, I wasn’t finding the explanations or descriptions that are half-formed in my head, because I’ve integrated the concepts in ways that don’t always tie directly back to their source. It’s like this information about integrating the psyche has integrated just like a psyche. Does knowledge live in our minds and become a psychic phenomena, become an archetype like the shadow or animus? That’s a frightening thought.


I hate everything about long term care insurance

And yet, I must learn about it in light of the new Washington state regulation regarding it starting next year. I saw this YouTube video explaining that there were types of LTC. Which I didn’t know and never wanted to know. But there is a thing called asset-based long term care insurance, and that might be a thing I want? Links gathered to be scrutinized with the husband later.

What is Asset-Based Long-Term Care?

Traditional LTC vs Asset-Based LTC

Asset-Based Plans (AKA Hybrid or Linked Benefits)

Being a consumer of my own misfortune is really as horrible as it sounds!