jabberwockypie:

viridian-witch:

that-eds-life:

Physical touch is very startling, and can be triggering. It also can hurt people!
If you don’t have permission, don’t touch!! Why do I have to say this!!

Many people with chronic conditions (especially fibromyalgia or neuropathy) experience allodynia, which is the sensation of pain triggered by light pressure. I have days where brushing against my soft sheets or cotton underwear cause me pain. Imagine what an unexpected pat on the back or hug would feel like someone in this state. If you can’t imagine, I’ll tell you: it’s fucking excruciating. Also, don’t be a creep and touch people without asking.

Also if you touch someone who isn’t expecting it who has PTSD, you might get an elbow in the face.  Or groin.  Or … look, it’s been close a few times.

And I LIKE being touched! Most of the time! By people who I said are okay for touching!

Unless I’m upset in a way that it’s a time for NOT touching, which is also a thing that should be respected.  Someone being okay with being touched one time does not mean they are ALWAYS okay with being touched.  Even if one time they wanted a hug when they were upset!  If it is a DIFFERENT KIND of upset, they might not be okay with being touched then.

There are emotionally abusive parents who either use withholding touch as a punishment or overriding a child’s boundaries or desire for personal space or choice about being touched.  (Like “You’re upset, so you need a hug to shut you up”.  It’s not unlike that creepy “shut up kiss” trope in movies.)  Or both.  In adults, that can make your relationship to being touched REALLY WEIRD.  (Even if you’re touch-starved.)  Consent is IMPORTANT!

“Would you like a hug?” is a good phrase.

dogmatix:

For @punsbulletsandpointythings, Obi/Qui with Fake Relationship cliche.

This one is technically in the same universe as the Immortal!AU, but all you really need to know is that Qui-Gon is presumed dead but is actually alive and making his way as a bounty hunter.  Obi-Wan has taken Anakin as a padawan, but is doing a solo mission.  Qui-Gon also helps Obi-Wan out whenever he can, hence why they’re on the same planet (even if they didn’t arrive exactly at the same time.)


He was going to kill
Qui-Gon.  Obi-Wan stalked into the local
precinct of city-guards, forcibly ignoring his ‘outfit,’ which clinked and
swished around him, showing more skin than not, and teasing with glimpses of
more.

“I’m here to bail out my Master,” he said without
thinking, slamming down a handful of high-denomination credits on the receiving
desk.

Keep reading

words-writ-in-starlight:

#rogue one#star wars#my creative writing class thinks this is a bad ending#because everybody dies#and they remind me that at the beginning of the class I told them cliche endings like ‘it was all a dream’ and ‘everybody dies’ were bad#THIS IS THE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE I try to tell them#maybe one day they’ll learn#anyway#perfect ending is perfect

Hold my beer while I try (and probably fail) to articulate this.

This movie is somewhat unique in my experience because the death of all the main characters seems like the good and necessary end to the plot, and I think part of the reason this is true is because, basically, they don’t die for shock value or because Anyone Can Die, they die because this is a war and they are people who exist solely in the context of the war.  I love AU’s where Bodhi meets Finn and Chirrut explains the Force to Luke as much as the next person, but within the context of the characters that we are given, in order to complete their personal arcs to satisfaction, they all have to die in this war.  

You have Chirrut, who is the last relic of a religion whose lifeblood has been stolen to power a weapon of the enemy–his only peace as a character is to die bringing that weapon and that enemy to its knees.  There is no Temple for him to guard, there are only a handful of kyber crystals left in the galaxy, and there’s no way for him to change that.  Characters need closure, it’s what makes an ending satisfactory, and Chirrut’s only closure is to do what he can to right this impossible wrong, there’s nothing else for him, and that means he has to die bringing the weapon down.

You have Baze, who doesn’t even have his faith anymore, all he has is Chirrut and his gun.  Well, we just established that Chirrut has to die to close his personal arc.  Baze has nothing to tie him to the world without Chirrut, because the war has taken everything from him–his people, his home, his faith, and now his partner.  Baze is, I think, very much a story of loss, so his closure comes from knowing that he has reclaimed some part of that, and there is no way–given his character and what we see of him–for him to reclaim any of that except in the face of death, when he is able to lay claim to his faith again.  And that’s only possible because, at the last moment, Baze has nothing except the faith that Chirrut held for him all this time.  And of course he can only take that back in the face of certain death.

You have Bodhi, who is the one with the message.  That’s what his whole arc is about, getting the message to where it’s supposed to go.  I think I’ve talked about this before, but Bodhi…he’s pretty much burned all his bridges, his home in Jedha is gone and he’s a traitor and a rogue, all he has left is the message and the hope that someone is listening.  For his narrative to end the moment he gets confirmation that “Yes, Rogue One, we hear you” is a very clean, natural close, because it offers him the assurance of a task completed.

And then you have Jyn and Cassian, who are very much creations of the war in their own ways.  They exist because of the war.  They would not tolerate being out of the war, because they’ve never known anything but.  There is no future for them, the way they’re portrayed in the movie, except to win the war at the price of their own lives.  They’re not villains to be redeemed or heroes to be lauded, they are people who have been carved so much into the form and function of a weapon that they wouldn’t know how to be anything else anymore.  And we get that impression very much over the course of the movie, with the way that absolutely everything is second to Cassian’s mission and the way that even at her most removed Jyn is still a soldier at heart.  They are Achilles, not Odysseus–there is not a safe haven and a home waiting for them.  They are destined to challenge the unbreakable city and die bringing it down.

And K-2…K-2 is Cassian’s imaginary friend, in a lot of ways.  He created K-2, he taught K-2, he fed love and humor and duty, always duty, into K-2′s circuits until there was no empty space left.  Of course K-2 dies for Cassian.  Of course he does.

So Rogue One works because these are all people whose personal narratives are crafted and supported by the war, and because these are all people whose closure is a grave.  They’re not Luke, who closes his arc with saving Vader, or Han, who closes his arc with finding something to fight for and someone who loves him, or even Leia, who closes her arc by avenging her planet through the saving of another.  They’re not the heroes of a grand and sweeping epic.  They are the martyrs whose stories could only end in peace when they died doing their duty.

This. This makes sense of why I was good with the movie in the theater, despite loving the characters and wanting to give them all worlds where they don’t die. But at the same time, have not felt an urge to write an AU which is explicitly where something in the time frame of the movie itself changes. Because the canon deaths make sense and feel right.

(That I am going to figure out how to not kill them in various running AUs has nothing to do with whether or not their canon makes sense with everyone dying by the end of the movie, and everything to do with exploring what changes in the characters because of the changes already wrought on the universe.)

thebibliosphere:

raivex:

thebibliosphere:

Just while we’re on the subject of spelling and grammar, I do appreciate when people point things out to me. Sometimes I do make mistakes, sometimes it’s autocorrect. Other times it’s a pun (forever the curse of a pun lover) and it goes over other people’s heads. Other times I’m writing something off the cuff and in rapid fire and I’ll miss things here and there in the quick scan I do before moving on to the next thing I need to do on here so it feels like I am not ignoring people. 

But here’s the thing, people sending me “wow you’re an editor and you type like that? lol” messages? Is a dick move for several reasons and I’ll tell you why…

First of all: I am not at work when I am on tumblr. I might as well be my second full time job at this point, but I am not in actual fact on the clock when I am here.

I am not at work when I am texting someone unless I am texting them as a client. I am not at work when I am having conversations with people online, unless they are my client. 

You can correct my grammar or my spelling if you want, but don’t make some derisive comment about me being a writer and an editor and not being able to type and make it into a thing like “wow I guess  could be an editor too if it’s that easy” just because you’re being pedantic with someone you are having an informal conversation with. 

It takes more than the ability to spell and get your grammar right 100% of the time to be an editor. It is not an easy job to be an editor. Which is why when I am not at work, my typing goes to absolute shit because I don’t have the excess energy to expend on that level of concentration when I am not working. Or sometimes just plain don’t give a shit. Like, I do not care. My typing is imperfect when I am talking rapid fire, sometimes with multiple people over multiple platforms at once. Woopdiedoo.

And when you’re mean about it? When you say? “I can’t help it, I know it doesn’t matter but it annoys me when people can’t spell”? 

You’re not only admitting that you don’t care enough to regulate behavior which you know is rude to others, you are also being ableist and quite possibly racist as well. 

Not everyone finds it easy to write, and I don’t mean that in the creative sense, I mean that in the very basic sense that some people with learning difficulties struggle to read and write. 

This does not make them less intelligent than you. It does not make them less brilliant than you. It does not mean they give any less of a shit about something important than you do, or are any less deserving of your respect and civility than some asshole who is an asshole but who knows how to use an em dash correctly.

I’ve dropped clients who had good grammar and spelling, but I just plain couldn’t deal with their attitude, and stuck with the people apologizing over and over for how much work I have to do on their manuscript because they know. They know they’re not as good as everyone else and the social stigma around it is so overwhelming it undermines everything they will ever do.

Other people may also not come from the same culture as you, speak the same languages as you, or have had access to the same opportunities you have had. If their way of communicating is understood but doesn’t conform the views of intelligence, quite frankly instilled by White Nationalism and Colonization and you tear them down for not conforming to your limited world view of propriety? They’re not the problem here, you are.

Someone’s ability to spell does not indicate their value or worth, or even the time they have put into something. I see so many rebuttals on this hellsite and on other places, where people go out of their way to invalidate the words of other people simply because they mixed up “your” and “you’re”, even though it doesn’t stop their meaning from being understood (and honestly it’s most likely auto-correct and you know it), but hey I guess it’s just way easier to tear someone down based on an arbitrary and false idea of assigned intelligence and societal worth based on their use of English grammar than it is to come up with an actual rebuttal. Boy aren’t you a hero.

So just…like…I get it, I get you see something and it’s incorrect and part of you may niggle at it and yes there are times when “perfection” is not only expected but required and spelling and grammar is important (or else I wouldn’t have the job I am very good at). But just, I dunno, quit being a dick to people because you’re a pedantic asshole who wants to feel superior. 

At the end of the day we’re all just sentient atoms hurtling towards the same unknown. The least you can do is be kind.

I 98% agree with this. Only question I have is how is it racist? I’m not trying to be rude, I’m genuinely curious because I haven’t been able to think of a way that it is racist.

@raivex to answer your question, (and I apologize for the lack of sources and if this is poorly written, I am doing this from my bed via mobile so there’s no way in heck I’m going to do this justice) there are a lot of people, online and off, who ascribe to an idea of “Proper English” and perceive it as being a hallmark of intelligence and cultural…validity? I suppose? 

To give you an example of how this works, for me growing up in Scotland, I was always in trouble for “not speaking properly”, when in actual fact I was. I was just speaking Scots, which is its own dialect and some people do argue, own language, as it uses words rooted in our origin of culture that are not found in the English language which has different roots. So, what my teachers meant when I spoke and wrote in my native Scots, was “stop being a northern peasant and speak Imperial English” because English was and still is the perceived superior language considered to be a sign of superior class and intelligence. 

But only if you speak and write in a very narrow and rigid dialect of it which is not in fact native to a huge chunk of the populace in England itself. Amazing, I know.

People who do not speak or write in “Proper English” are often “othered” by those who do so as a means to justify not only their own social class standing above others, but also their support of social constructs which are built on class prejudice and racial oppression dating back to Western Colonization of well…everywhere. 

To give you a bigger and perhaps more recognizable example of this, I see this kind of thing a lot from people who say things like “well if they want to be taken seriously, they should stop speaking ghetto and learn to talk proper” when people use phonetic spelling or grammar as a means expression. (also emojis, emojis are included in this)

Often this argument is used derisively when referring to the use of AAVE (African American Vernacular English, for those unaware) either in written or spoken form, and is an incorrect assumption that AAVE is a purely a slang form of English created due to lack of culture and intelligence. 

This is both a) incorrect and b) based on racist propaganda that is deeply ingrained in White culture from our days of sailing the high seas “discovering” “new lands” and inflicting ourselves on the locals, like a gods damned plague. Quite literally.

What AAVE—and other regional based dialects are—is in actuality, a sociolect of English. 

Which is a fancy ass way of saying a totally legitimate form of English vernacular with its own

pronunciations (varying from region to region, as all language does), unique words, and grammatical rules and constructs. And it is absolutely recognized by linguistics as being a Proper way of speaking and writing. 

And if anyone wants to argue with that then they can meet me in the fucking pit cause I did not go to school for four years for some small minded pedant to imply English, an absolute cluster fuck of a language, is the purest form of expression.

AAVE is not lesser, nor lazy— traits which are often implied by people who attribute social value to the adherence of a very select snippet of the English dialect. Which as we’ve already noted, has its roots in White Ideology and Colonization.

Which, I’d like to say gives a whole new connotation to the term “grammar nazi” but honestly, the implication was always there. 

And again, yes, of course, there is a time and place for precise grammar and spelling, of course there is. But then there’s using someone’s ability to utilize proper grammar and spelling as a means of measuring their worth as a human being and how much respect you offer them, to which my invitation to meet me in the pit still stands.

The concept of language being sacred—but only a certain type of language—and needing to be respected is rooted deeply in problematic and harmful ideation of false superiority. And some people really need to fucking chill over it.

elodieunderglass:

martianaviator:

brehaaorgana:

the-real-linus-torvalds:

brehaaorgana:

imhades-imqueer-getoverit:

the-real-persephone:

gaymilesedgeworth:

the-real-persephone:

gaymilesedgeworth:

the-real-persephone:

moodyehudi:

animatedamerican:

rugelachs:

gaymilesedgeworth:

gaymilesedgeworth:

this is so goyische 

[goyische voice] either you’re an atheist or you think gravity is fake and live in terror of being flung off the face of the earth. one or the other

not to get serious on this post but I hate that people unfamiliar with Judaism assume that we have to underestimate god like that. Hashem is everywhere, so why on earth couldn’t Hashem be present in gravity, and evolution, and idk, cellular respiration? small minded! to respect god is to not underestimate god, and to understand that god is present in powerful and complex systems, as much as god is present in simple, mundane things.

image

(source)

and like, Rosalind Franklin was an observant Jewish woman. 

The only possible way the original image is a valid question is if underneath it is additional text: “Check all that apply.

there are only 2 genders

god and science

i guess the reason atheists think that it’s one or the other is because you either believe in science and, yknow, logic

or you believe there’s an all-powerful presence watching everyone and everything despite there being no evidence or literally any reason to believe that that’s the case

and it’s hard to imagine that someone could believe in all that shit and still be logical and reasonable enough to also give credit to science, especially considering this is one major area that totally proves why things exist and why they work and it has nothing to do with some omniscient being.

image

obviously i’m not a scientist but yknow i did go to school … AND a CATHOLIC school at that and they literally tried to teach us that science and religion could coexist and it was a bunch of nonsense because that is all religion is so? I don’t think I have to be a scientist to say that the reason things are the way they are has been explained whereas religious nuts seem to insist that ‘god created us all and He Is Responsible For Everything’

how stupid do you have to be to come on a Jewish post and explain that, since you went to Catholic school, you obviously know everything about “religion”

the reason i joked about you not being a scientist in the tags is because i am a scientist, and yet! here we are! 

i literally never said i know everything about religion but i know enough to be sure it’s ridiculous and many many religious people are often too brainwashed to give credit to science so it’s not really unreasonable to assume that?

it’s really as simply as this:

there are two options

  • be logical and do not believe anything that doesn’t provide sufficient evidence.

OR

  • be an idiot and believe in a higher power

One simply cannot recognize the advancements and discoveries of science while believing in a god, because science disproves the possibility of such a being. This is an absolute violation of basic science. They truly are incompatible.

anyways lots of religious jews are atheists y’all and @the-real-persephone are laughably ignorant and embarrassing. also the fact that you claim science disproves the possibility of a Jewish g-d proves that you have zero (0) idea about how jewish people even conceive of g-d 

Do you mean ethnic Jews? You completely ruined your argument when you said “lots of religious Jews are atheists”. No credibility. Do you even realize what you just said?

It’s not ignorant. Judeo-Christian religions believe in a relatively new Earth. They also don’t address the universe outside of Earth. Science proves the age of the universe to be far older than these religions claim. So to be quite honest, it seems as if not only did you make a completely idiotic statement, you managed to ignore the basic principles of science that contradict religion.

Honey I’m a Jewish woman telling you that I know atheist Jews who practice and observe the Jewish religion. They are RELIGIOUSLY practicing Jewish people! I know at least one of them is on the board of my Synagogue! I know many Rabbis who are openly agnostic! The fact that you are trying to argue with me, a Jewish person, with the OP, a Jewish person, and with a LOT OF OTHER JEWISH PEOPLE about this is NOT something that makes me look like an idiot!

You say “judeo-Christian” as if that means something reliable and quantifiable that lumps Jewishness in with Christianity. Surprise! Many Jewish people observe their religion and do not believe in God! Judaism is not a religion that relies entirely on faith in belief, and that’s why the above screenshot is laughable. Judaism is a religion of PRACTICE, so belief in God alone does not make or break a religiously Jewish person.

Like you are so completely out of your depth here!

To go over this real quick

1.) judeo-xtian BZZZT. WRONG.
2.) a tiny minority of Jewish people ascribe to young earth ideas. The VAST majority do not.
3.) biblical literalism is far less common in Judaism and many argue that literalism is bad
4.) Again majority of Jewish thought is completely in line with an extremely old universe
5.) seriously our religious philosophers have argued this for quite some time. 13th century Ramban argued that time moved differently at the beginning of the universe before there was substance to be affected by time. When you consider that we didn’t know of the theory of relativity (also from a Jewish scientist!) at the time, that certainly gives us a precedence to understand that lots of Jewish people have assumed that we a.) did not have a literalist timeline in Genesis and b.) the universe was older than we could comprehend in the 1200s and we argued as such!

It’s your ignorance that is showing here.

Why are Christians.

I think that since the definition of “higher power” is being worked through so effectively and coherently, the discussion could use a definition of “scientific laws” to work with too. 

 I don’t believe that most practicing scientists would even say “the universe is ruled by scientific laws.” That is simply not what laws do. That is simply not what science does. The implication of “the universe is ruled by scientific laws” is that existence is deliberately reigned over, and further, the thing in charge of the universe is our own understanding of the universe? 

The question is poorly worded, yes, hinging on a bad and unclear vocabulary – but it’s also very silly. It’s an interesting example of thinking, in that there is a belief that SOME ENTITY simply MUST be the undisputed divine boss of everything, whether it is “laws” or “a god”, this idea that there MUST be a leader or governor. “Something rules the universe!” the screenshot says with airy certainty, as if existence exists to be governed, and the only question is whether personal appeals to the governor will make any difference. As if the fact that existence exists means that there has to be a hierarchy with a ruler at the top. There’s a boss somewhere, this question implies – a scientific senate, a CEO of existence, an Indisputable Answer to the question. “Deity or scientific laws!” – that’s what you get – they are complete opposites, and there can only be one! Pick your master, you have 2 (two) choices… and here’s the catch: both of them are “higher powers.” Because, one assumes, any powers that “rule” the universe are, in fact, higher powers. The entire question is so circular it’s meaningless. It’s an ouroborous, but instead of eating itself it’s crawling up its own ass.

A scientist – worth their salt – would answer – SHOULD answer – “there is no evidence that the universe is ruled by anything.”

If pressed, the scientist could suggest that we have plenty of evidence for how the universe appears to operate, and we are collecting ways to help us understand that. 

But those ways, which we discovered, are not our masters. We are not running around Doing Science in the hopes of naming our secret scientific overlords. We are not building a new god out of “laws” and setting it as the ruler of all that exists. Even having a third answer that is “check all that apply” doesn’t fit our current universe, because the first answer is “higher powers – monotheistic religion flavor” and the second answer is “higher powers – fake science boys vaguely atheistic flavor.”

Anyway, the screenshot is a picture of a radio button with two choices, that some people can happily press to feel like they have a tribe. I, like many of the people above, would not pick any of those buttons because they do not describe a working model of the operation of the universe.

If you dragged me and forced me to complete the sentence “the universe is ruled by…”, I would say “itself, probably,” and to further qualify the statement, I would write in front of the question, “I believe.”

Even Racists Got the Blues

deadcatwithaflamethrower:

meabhair:

allthingslinguistic:

A particularly ironic tale of translation gone awry on The Geeky Gaeilgeoir:

I’m often baffled by the number of people who seem to think that you can translate from one language to another simply by pulling the words of one language from a dictionary and plugging them into the syntax of the other. It just doesn’t work that way, friends. Repeat after me: “Languages are not codes for one another.”

That’s exactly what happened here, though. Someone either found a dictionary or searched the internet for the three words “blue,” “lives,” and “matter,” and stuck them together as if they were English. Oy. Dia sábháil (that’s Ulster Irish for “oy”).

[…]

Another thing this poor “translator” apparently forgot is that the word “lives” in English can be pronounced to rhyme with “gives” or with “hives,” and that the meaning changes accordingly.

What was wanted here, of course, is “lives” as rhymes with “hives.” Three guesses as to which one the “translator” chose. Yep. Wrong one.

[…]

The funny thing here is, the Irish word gorm actually does mean “blue” in most contexts. Just not in this manner, and definitely not in this context.

When color is used to describe a person in Irish, it typically refers to hair color. For example An bhean rua: The red-haired woman. […]

All that having been said, though, here’s the lovely, delicious irony: When the word gorm is used in reference to people, guess what it means?

It means “Black.”

People of African descent, or with similarly dark skin, are described as “blue” in Irish (most likely because dubh (“black”) and dorcha (“dark”) have negative connotations in the language and donn (“brown”) would be understood to refer to hair color).

That’s right. At the end of the day, allowing for grammatical travesties (of which there are many) and horrendous word choices, what this person’s shirt says is “Black Lives Matter.”

Somehow that makes me strangely happy.

I’ve been cackling at this linguistic mess since I saw the tshirt. Irish is not a wierd looking version of English, it’s an ancient and evolving language with a different way of structuring sentences with a range of pitfalls, and I’m glad that racist bollox fell right into one. Tá daoine gorma tábhachtach!

Also, as an aside, Ireland doesn’t have a police force, we have An Garda Síochána, or the Gardaí. In English, it means Guardians of the Peace, and as a rule they don’t carry guns unless they’re part of an armed response unit.

@maawi @obaewankenope @deadcatwithaflamethrower @stonefreeak @eclipsemidnight @lilyrose225writes @sanerontheinside some linguistics for your entertainment

*CACKLING*

Even Racists Got the Blues

clairelutra:

seeing some nasty anti-lurker posts going around rn and just

this is your friendly daily reminder that i appreciate you no matter how you choose to interact or not interact with me/my fics

  • if you wanna drop a kudos or a like? *fingerguns* my dude, you are the bomb
  • if you commented/reviewed/reblogged with nice tags? tbh you have restored my health and unknowingly added 100-1k+ words to the next fic draft, just like that.
  • if you drew fanart/wrote fic/etc inspired by my fic? the above, plus anything you want, any request you send is now at the very tippy top of my list of my priority list, i guarantee you. (i’d offer you my firstborn, but i like to offer things i actually have the ability to provide.)

but at the same time:

  • got to the end of my fic and didn’t feel much like dropping kudos? sorry dude, i feel that. tastes don’t always match up! i hope whatever you find next suits you better 🙂
  • lurking and worried about who’ll see you online if you click ‘like’? been there, done that. i hope your lurking is restful ♥
  • clicked on my fic but wasn’t hooked? again, tastes don’t always match up! i’ve definitely been there and done that. what kind of person would i be if i held that against you?
  • binge-reading an entire archive of X type of fic to the point where you forgot to click the button because you were so busy clicking ‘next’? been there, done that. when the fever strikes, it strikes. i hope you find exactly what you’re looking for 😀
  • wanna comment but just too tired? bitch, s a m e. squee and cry and analyze and relish in your fannish glee in peace and please don’t feel bad for not having the energy to put yourself out like that. we’ve all been there at some point, promise. :’)
  • using a link to my story to get on the archive/ffn but actually don’t have any interest in reading it at all? *bows* it was my honor to be a stepping stone
  • any other reason you didn’t leave any sort of feedback? it’s okay, it’s good, i promise you that you haven’t hurt my feelings. people read fic for all sorts of reasons, and sometimes that reason doesn’t involve clicking a button or dropping a few words, and that’s okay.

do i want feedback? of course! i’m not going to lie and say it’s not my lifeblood. i’m a writer. i live for validation (quite literally—fanfiction kept me from hitting rock bottom during some of the worst times of my life).

but if you’re not up for it, for whatever reason, that validation doesn’t have to come from you. it can come from someone with more spoons, who’s in a better place, who’s more outgoing, who enjoyed the fic more, anything.

the fan experience is supposed to be fun for everyone. i want validation, yes, but never at the expense of yours.

bubonickitten:

bubonickitten:

me: why am i so irritable out of nowhere?? where is this mood coming from?? 

that familiar Onset Of A Migraine twinge in my right temple: 

image

me: Ah, I See 

#Oh my GOD#is this why I’m an asshole right before migraines happen#is that a fucking symptom holy shit#headaches (via @serpentinegraphite)

yup, a lot of folks who experience chronic migraines report irritability in the prodrome phase, sometimes up to a day before pain even sets in. 

i never made the connection myself until i started reading about migraine auras and warning signs, and now i’ve identified it as a pretty consistent warning sign for me – when i suddenly and inexplicably feel irritable for no discernible reason, chances are there’s a migraine in my immediate future. it can also be a symptom in the postdrome phase immediately following the migraine attack. 

here are a few links that talk about it:

Migraine Symptoms: Anger & Irritability

Migraine Symptoms: The Stages of a Migraine

The postdrome: migraine’s silent sister