So you do love me. So you love me with all your heart. I’m babelicious. I have da booty.” x

#nmtd

thatsnotwatyourmomsaid:

easily my favorite picture in the world

allinablur replied to your post:On Why I Agree with the Writing Decisions of The Candle Wasters in the 2 Latest Episodes of NMTD

interesting! but i have more of a generic question, salma. given that you see people as a blank slate, what do you think of people w/ certain genetic factors, chemical imbalances or altered brain connections? those might affect people from early on.

This one’s a tough one hmmmm. Assuming that you’re talking about mental illnesses or hormonal imbalances (too much testosterone making people more aggressive and hostile etc.), I think the idea of Tabula Rasa (blank slate) still applies. However every rule or theory has an exception and  in more extreme cases where these disorders can cause an individual to become aggressive to the point where it is considered inherently evil, I think that it stops applying. However, I don’t consider them inherently evil because I think the definition of evil an evil person is someone who makes the active decision to do bad things in the state of mind where they are able to control their thoughts and emotions. This wouldn’t apply to people with these mental illnesses or chemical imbalances that can disrupt functions of the brain, so they aren’t inherently evil, nonetheless. (pls let me know if I’m being offensive in any way)

Really interesting question though! Thanks for asking.

On Why I Agree with the Writing Decisions of The Candle Wasters in the 2 Latest Episodes of NMTD

So I was tweeting about this earlier and I kind of just wanted to get my opinions out there so here’s a rant and stuff.

Ok as you can tell from the title, I agree with the writing choices in the past two episodes of NMTD. This doesn’t necessarily mean that The Candle Wasters had this same thought process when writing these episodes. Or I’ve entered into the minds of 4 women from NZ and am voicing exactly what they were thinking when they were writing. It all depends.

Let’s talk about situational vs dispositional attribution of behavior. Dispositional attribution is the assumption that an individual’s behavior is determined by internal characteristics (this means that behavior is attributed to whether or not someone is good or evil in most cases (including this one)) Situational attribution is analyzing a person’s actions with regards to the situation he or she is in.

To fully understand this rant, you’ll have to take into account that I don’t think that anyone is inherently good or evil. In my opinion, people are born with a blank slate (Tabula Rasa) (shoutout to my homie John Locke) and are influenced by the situations they are placed in throughout their life time (either society or popular belief systems etc.) In my opinion, all behavior is situational. No one is inherently bad. Yeah the things people do can be bad but these actions are determined by the persons situations. You stole that laptop because you’re broke. You mistreated that person bc society has made it normal and expected for you to mistreat people in the situation that you are placed in. (Reference Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment for further evidence. Triggers though. Abuse, sexual harassment and mistreatment.)

Claudio’s situation caused him to think this way. Had he been raised with open minded parents and people who educated him on the nature of relationships he wouldn’t have behaved the way he did. So yeah. Claudio isn’t shitty, his actions are. And I think Hero took that into account when she decided to forgive him. I think that after the hell they put Claudio through (making him believe that hero was dead and then extremely sick) was enough to make him realize that his actions were extremely shitty and based on flawed beliefs. I think he had learned his lesson and I think that the fact that he came to that realization is what Hero, Bea and Ben were trying to accomplish the whole time. They thought it was enough to convey their message.

Actions do sometimes warrant isolation and exclusion (see Alex Day) but I think that the actions in this situation don’t. Beliefs can be altered to be less discriminatory and prejudiced, but as Caroline said, there is a fine line between which actions warrant forgiveness and which warrant letting someone back into your life. This line varies from person to person. For Hero I think that line is far different from Beatrice’s line and even then I think Claudio’s actions were extremely close to warranting exclusion on Hero’s ‘scale’, so to speak. But Hero is forgiving and trusting and wouldn’t seem like the type to hold grudges and the fact that she isn’t dating Claudio and is taking this relationship step by step now is a really good writing decision in my honest opinion.

I think that there are 3 life lessons in this specific story arch. 1) slut shaming is disgusting. 2) people aren’t property. And 3) forgiveness is sometimes the best option.

This is long and rant-y and stuff but read it because it’ll provide insight into a slightly unpopular belief, which is sometimes just what we need to understand both viewpoints in a topic.

Also please take into account that this isn’t the right way of thinking this is just my way of thinking and unlike Beatrice, I’m not always right.

enchantedandwild:

feeling spooky

sorelatable:

It’s so frustrating when you’re like the only person who can see how evil and sneaky someone is and everyone else is like blind to it

leepace-daily:

if you look up perfect in the dictionary i’m pretty sure it’ll say lee pace

kawaiirostam:

[aziz ansari voice] :D

like-rhinestones-fromthesky:

Ur Fave is Problematic: Pedro Donaldson