JLongbone on fetishes - no-kinkshame chronicles

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsrzU0fqOp8

22:25 exactly the issue with fetishists

Most just end up emotional dumping their imprint misfires on the rest of the planet through the internet as if they're in the privacy of a room.

Then get wound tight when someone finally says the quiet part out loud; after making their issues everyones business in the first place: The premise of the linked timestamp.

100% confident as long as everyone's in on it.

However with that illusion of confidence, peacocking such mess in the public scheme, waaay beyond boorus and deviantart but on YOUTUBE & others , ten toes down, for years on end.

Then nothing but crickets or straight up panic when an NPC pulls up and says the quit part out loud, even if just ironically in passing.

And it's even WORSE if that person has receipts on the psychological/social lore behind what the fuck it is these people are even playing with for decades on end.

Lore that even psychologists aren't putting on the table, which is partly to blame for a good amount of this "explore it" enablement culture, cowardice.

Note: The OLNY natural phase of a fetishes origin is the fact that a child doesn't control when or what they're imprinting on. So errors can & do happen. Hence fetish.

• Nothing is wrong with one, us, you, or people cause imprinting errors happen, how far one takes it is when the accountability comes knocking.

Meaning a hyper-fixation/fetish on most paraphilia is essentially a brain glitch. A misfire, because your untrained, malleable child mind is conflating one thing with something else that it's not, because of a mistranslation stemmed from an emotion evoked by said thing in an underdeveloped brain.

• Which is explains why a lot of fetishists act like actual children in regression context or the fantasy is straight up infantile.

• Ppl get too caught up in the communities/cults, the illusion of security of owning it or this "embrace" shit when in reality it's a game of: "Tell me you're an addict without admitting you have issues you let fester like an infected wound"

So no, it's not permanent (dun dun duuun), nor a gift from the universe, nor an identity trait, it's not destiny, it's an adoption, DLC. Cope. A brain glitch.

Because "Neuroplasticity" exists

Look up "Neuro-plasticity", that's where this illusion of fetishes being identity or perma, or destiny or whatever they tell themselves to cope- comes from.

Despite this very modern sentiment of being protective of what is essentially a Windows Update Error in the human mind:

Fetishes are not sacred concepts no one can't ever challenge, it's not an orientation, it's an imprint misfire.

And if this is news to any of us because the "experts" want to destigmatize everything to save their own optics, or omit morality from study to avoid over-pathologizing (which in concept is an understandable reason) but miss the fact that to avoid over-pathologizing because they feel judgement of fetishes is either wrong or likely gratuitous-

that in itself IS A MORAL JUDGEMENT in the first place.

So morality in psychology is a problem, unless I decide to use my morality to say using morality avoid calling a spade a spade cause it will hurt people's feelings cause everyone's got a fetish, which is a lie, more people have kinks than fetishes.

A fetish is a statement of sexual ineptitude, that you NEED specifically some paraphilia in order to get going, which is a sexual handicap. Not a evolutionary advantage.

So this "hot harming anyone" clause deriving from destigmatization deriving from the MORAL decision to omit morality from psychological overview is a meaningless excuse #1, and at worst: hypocrisy and negligence, stemming from good intentions (where a lot of bad decisions come from).

Thanks experts, what would we do without you..

'Cope for a cope' is this narrative:

• "It's part of who I am",

• "owning it"

• "embrace the monster",

All this bullshit a damn child wouldn't say while huffing laughing gas, is coming out the mouths of grownass adults, desperate to exist; even as a disgrace if they have to.

Having a fantasy on the brain is not the fault of imprinting, that's called "immersion learning" or the like, it's how you learn a language, Basically repeat conditioning.

• So If you've rammed/ violated your mind without a condom with the same crap ad infinitum, it's not your childhood that caused your mind to be stuck on it, it's addiction that did that.

JLongBone in the video got it 1000%, and I've been saying this already. Half the issue isn't that sexual variations exist, if people didn't feel the need to push it everywhere on almost every platform BECAUSE they're insecure and need the world to pay attention, clamor in reddit/threads/ communities pumping out content looking for cheerleaders & handjobbers to tell them they did a good job being a doof.

Constant hunt for justification.

Some people have enough sense to get their lives together & remold what they're attracted to as a kink.

Kinks (depending on what it is) can add flavor to sexuality vs Fetishism is where instincts & braincells go to rot to instead buff regression & devolution stats.

Too much regression.

*Gunn & Corenswet's clashing ideas for the emotional climax monologue scene * ( Peacemaker & Marvel Zombies is TRASH @youtube)

https://youtu.be/1vU-L2y3SGY?si=wA70uhOmgygqjSSa&t=1070

17:50 Corenswet is right, the inflection of "That is being human!" has the 'something to prove' vibe because it mirrors his outbursts earlier. Vs being collected, not forcing it, which is a stark change

I get Gunn's perspective too, this is the emotional climax of the movie, so it fits to show the vulnerability. Issue is what we define as "vulnerable", men being emotional is not the same as *being vulnerable. Corenswets stance would align better with a development angle--

Supes being more lowkey without brusque assertion "But that is being human." in a less 'something to prove' delivery to a guy he: DOES NOT KNOW or have any history with- The history gap issue would still exist with D.C's idea, but it would sting less in that context.

and since that stupid mutt cut off the conversation(I hate Krypto), we got to see Gunn's direction of the scene which in affect was an incomplete exchange. Why the dog? Likely cause he didn't know how to wrap the scene up with maturity, same shit Horikoshi does.

after 3 years of activity, this movie was when these two finally met, according to Lex. So Gunn has all this pent up outburst written here, when these two actually have no dynamic or history to even base it on, as if they've had this conversation before.

"Is this not the moment where I feel, 'I was wrong to feel that way.'" On Davids part its not about right or wrong to be low, but Supes doesn't have to show Lex vulnerability just to stand his ground. getting rid of the dog helps too, but i get what they're both saying.

I appreciate this exchange (between Gunn & Corenswet), to be honest. It adds some context per on-set dynamics. It's necessary on set (sometimes) for actors to have that kind of backbone & chime in and be receptive. Glad he smelt the same stench of contrivance that I do.

For Davids idea, 

Supes would've went through enough to warrant a collected, "I really know it" delivery. So it wouldn't be he just changes suddenly for no reason (which is also a contrivance btw) At THIS point, he would know it without sounding like he's justifying himself.

(side note: this explains the lois & clark scene where he blew up on her like a manchild, NOW I get it. I understand conviction, passion, doubling down on helping people abroad in ethnic disputes but getting that pissed off, emotional was just bad characterization. Could only imagine the possible reservation David had with that scene. I almost worried for Lois, like calm down, you're not 13, Mr.Kent.)