3 weeks ago
Empathy isn’t just something that happens to us — a meteor shower of synapses firing across the brain — it’s also a choice we make: to pay attention, to extend ourselves. It’s made of exertion, that dowdier cousin of impulse. Sometimes we care for another because we know we should, or because it’s asked for, but this doesn’t make our caring hollow. The act of choosing simply means we’ve committed ourselves to a set of behaviors greater than the sum of our individual inclinations: I will listen to his sadness, even when I’m deep in my own. To say ‘going through the motions’ — this isn’t reduction so much as acknowledgment of the effort — the labor, the motions, the dance — of getting inside another person’s state of heart or mind.

This confession of effort chafes against the notion that empathy should always arise unbidden, that genuine means the same thing as unwilled, that intentionality is the enemy of love. But I believe in intention and I believe in work. I believe in waking up in the middle of the night and packing our bags and leaving our worst selves for our better ones.
— Leslie Jamison, from The Empathy Exams (via daxsymbiont)

(Source: greatunknowns)

3 weeks ago
4 weeks ago
tagged: please,
1 month ago
tagged: yes,
I have ruined relationships for fear of ruining those relationships.
1 month ago
tagged: LOL,
Anonymous said: Hello. I just re-watched the pilot episode, and I could be absolutely wrong, but I think there is Anteros (the Greek god of requited love) in it, when the title shows. Subtext? I can't help it, I'm 'clueing for looks' all over the show, because you spoiled me. :P I love your blog & metas btw, and I think you're brilliant! Also, sorry if that's already been answered.


…Jesus Christ.  

You guys. Uh, yeah. This is true.

For reference, here’s Anteros, the Greek god of requited love… the wiki picture is this exact statue. That’s REQUITED love. REQUITED. Anteros is specifically the avenger of unrequited love.



Bless you, anon. Bless you.

1 month ago
1 month ago
tagged: love,
1 month ago
tagged: noooooooooooooooooooooooope,
2 months ago
tagged: so relevant,

The “romantic-sexual/platonic” love dichotomy leaves no room for the real emotional nuances people experience in their attachments, and I think that it often causes us to live with simplified relationships not because we want to or because we have simple desires and feelings but because we have no experience, cultural context, or language to accommodate a complex social life or set of relationships. This is why language is so important. This is why words and labels matter. How can you have the kind of relationships you want with anyone, if you don’t even have the words to accurately express how you feel? Hell, half the time, people don’t even understand their own feelings and relationship desires because what they feel is not simple at all, but the only relationship framework they know makes everything seem simple and clear cut: romance and sex go together, friendship is separate from both of those things, couplehood/primary partnership is exclusive to romance and sex, etc.

But if we are to accept the possibilities and realities of asexual romance, primary nonsexual/nonromantic love, nonromantic sex and sexual friendship, romantic (nonsexual) friendship, queerplatonic nonsexual relationships and sexual relationships, etc…. we have to drop this way of thinking and speaking about relationships and love in a romantic-sexual/platonic dichotomous way. None of those “complex” relationships fit into that model.