actually, you know what

don’t commit suicide because “people would miss you” and “everyone would blame themselves”

don’t commit suicide, for yourself, because you’re fucking awesome and you’re gonna be really fucking happy some day and if you commit suicide you’re never going to get to realize what it’s like to be completely in love with your life and yourself

you deserve to be alive for you, not for anyone else

This is nice in theory

But if you’ve ever been suicidal, the fact that you don’t believe in or care about or even like yourself can be a huge factor in why you want to commit suicide in the first place. And as much as the latter statement is true -- you should stay alive because you matter, you’re awesome, and your problems are absolutely solvable -- it doesn’t always help to hear that in a time of crisis.

Because all you hear is lies. Even though they’re truths. You hear lies. Lies that you think are only said to prevent you from committing suicide. Which you desperately want to do. 

When you’re depressed to a suicidal degree it can be impossible to believe you’re worth the air you’re breathing, let alone worth a whole life and recovery. 

And if I can’t be frank, one of the only things that has consistently brought me back from similarly dangerous places, is the thought of my family and friends in mourning. The thought of how angry and devastated and guilty they would feel. 

However, I’m privileged in that I have a very supportive family and wonderful friends. And I know that’s a privilege many people don’t have. 

So for them, you’re right, the encouragement of a stranger to hold on for a life outside of that darkness, because they’re worth it, might be more effective. 

Everyone is different and everyone experiences mental illness differently, no matter the diagnosis. 

I think the important thing, regardless of how this happens, is that suicidal individuals find that reason to live. No matter what it is or what form it takes. 

Because there are so. many. reasons. 

For some it might be for family and friends.

For some it might be for themselves. 

For others it might be for a perfect fall afternoon, when the sun is high and warm against the fading trees, but the wind is crisp and cool. 

Or the first bite into a perfectly ripe nectarine.

Or the next installment in a beloved movie franchise. 

Or the kindness of a grocery store cashier. 

It isn’t about longevity when you’re looking for a reason not to die. Yes, eventually the goal is to recover, to cope, to live for yourself -- but when you’re beyond hope? Anything to sustain you, anything at all, is what is vital. 

It’s not about what you find -- it’s that you keep looking. 

Alan Moore (via class-snuggle)

#i cant

system failure

Chandler Nash is Buffy Summers. That is all.

[x]

Chandler. We're them. 

After Adam Glass's tweets and the last few days.

Here’s the thing. He gave a BS cop-out answer. Better to not have said anything. But a few real issues it brought up:

1) The characters do not belong to the fans, the belong to the writers, show, studio, and network. We go by what they show us. They are telling us a story. We are not making it up.

2) As I’ve said, in telling that story they use every standard device that says ‘this is a subtextual or subtle romantic tension build up.’ That is not the audience being kinky. It’s not ridiculous. Mocking fans for what we observe is ridiculous. Slash fiction and that stuff aside, we’re not responsible for their content.

3) They interact with fans a lot and get ideas. Which is awesome as an audience and new and a great way to get ideas and do it. Yes. That’s revolutionary and also dangerous. They get wicked props for breaking all the rules and generally doing it effectively. But while what they say isn’t ‘official news’, it does require sensitivity and awareness of who’s reading it.

4) To say a relationship is ‘too many things to too many people’ to define is bull crap. Again, it’s their content. And they’re not such crap writers that they couldn’t keep a romantic relationship complex, tense, and multidimensional (pun intended).

5) The Doctor and Rose is a perfect example. It was obvious but done via subtext and over time. But eventually the tension was released, and in a complex way that raised the stakes for another 2 seasons until it resolved in an even more crazy way.

6) That worked, and Doctor Who did not become just about them. But the love story added a lot to the show (the lack of intimate emotional stakes is even part of what many people don’t like about Moffat).

7) Supernatural could do the same- be a story that involves a great love story. That’s what got it most of its current audience anyway.

8) If Doctor Who had mocked the audience for seeing the obvious, belittled them as kinky fools, it would not have worked. They confirmed the obvious when it was time and didn’t deny it before then.

9) Supernatural has an added issue of sexuality representation. It’s why I don’t think they’re going to be able to bring it to fruition in any way, honestly. But it’s a missed opportunity to have a relationship depicted no differently from a straight one in this context.

10) So I submit that: It would be ideal to address and resolve it somewhat, even if it remains simmering and unable to be fully realized except for maybe one or two dramatic moments (as Rose and The Doctor made work). But to deny it is bad business and bad tv. Not only is easing and resolving tension good storytelling (it took Rose only 2 seasons and that felt like a lot), this social moment makes teasing out then denying gay sexual tension offensive and annoying.

Everyone loves a great complicated love story built into larger epic stories. No one likes feeling alienated by insultingly mixed messages.

I SHIP THIS SO HARD. SUCH BEAUTIFULNESS. AHJHHJHASHLDF.

Ohp and now I'm crying again.