An abuser is a grand manipulator and will sulk, threaten to leave, and emotionally punish you for not following their idea of how things should be. An abuser will try to make you feel guilty any time you exert your will and assert what is right for you. At times the abuser may appear to be apologetic and loving; the abuse begins again when the abuser feels he or she has your forgiveness.
I saw one of these sorts of things for INFPs, and thought I’d draft up a quick one for those who are unlucky enough to care about one of my kind.
- Be expressive. INTJs are not usually great at reading people, so we have no idea what you’re feeling unless you are very obvious about it. Please, please just tell us what you’re feeling so we can eliminate all the guesswork. For the love of God. DO NOT BE PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVE.
- Ask us what we’re thinking of feeling. If we trust you enough, we’ll open up—but if helps if you initiate the discussion. We’re really not comfortable with feelings, so it helps if the talk was “someone else’s idea.”
- If we’ve chosen you as one of the few people we’re going to be honest with, don’t ever imply we’re guilty of some sort of untruth. There is nothing more hurtful to an INTJ than being called dishonest when we’re actually being honest—because being honest is very hard for us.
- Be patient. This is a big one. We can be really slow with emotional things, so we’re not great at giving affirmations and such, and especially not at the right time. We’ll come around eventually, though.
- Keep in mind that we’re introverts. If we like you, we want to spend time with you, but, being introverts, we will get exhausted after a while. This doesn’t mean that we don’t love you (we do) but once our social battery juice is gone, it needs to be recharged, and there’s not much we can do until then. Caffeine is a good temporary remedy
TL;DR: Be direct and be patient.
Ada was born in 1815, the only legitimate child of poet/loveable whack-job Lord Byron (you know, the guy who hung out with Shelley and Keats? And wrote Don Juan and Childe Harold? And then went a bit nuts and tried to take over Greece? Yeah, that guy). Ada never met her father, since he was off being kind of nuts, and her mother was like “Ada, you are ONLY learning MATH and SCIENCE lest you become like your CRAZY FATHER by indulging in EVIL POETRY.”
But you just couldn’t hold Ada down because she did what she wanted to, you know? Ill a bunch as a child (and not like, “the illest” or whatever; like, ACTUALLY sick), Ada spent a lot of time reading (shout-out to frail, shy kids that read a lot of books) and developing her interest in the sciences. But fascinated by stories of her father, Ada wasn’t all about numbers – at 12, she decided that she wanted to fly, and used her wild imagination and scientific know-how to design a pair of mechanical wings, so basically she INVENTED Steampunk. By 18, she was having an affair with her tutor (YEAH SHE DID), but Ada’s mother covered it all up by sending her to court and marrying her off to a Baron, with whom she would have three kids but WHATEVER.
But do you think Ada let the married life slow her down HELL NAW SHE DIDN’T. She loved gambling and parties, and her chillness with dudes meant she was often followed by scandalous gossip (some things never change, amiright?). Obsessed with fairies and the “unseen worlds around us,” Ada would come to describe herself as an “Analyst (& Metaphysician),” studying “poetical science,” and publishing papers about how the brain creates thoughts and how music relates to math. Holy DAMN try to tell me that’s not kick-ass because I WON’T BELIEVE YOU.
Click through to read my whole awesome history of the incredible Ada Lovelace!!
Woooo that animated GIF is by the amazing Sydney Padua @ 2DGoggles.com — if you like Ada Lovelace, women in STEM, steampunk, wit, PUNS, kick-ass comics and generally awesome people, it is worth checking her out!
Someone asked me about my Bartimaeus drawings, and since I last drew them in High School I wasn’t to keen to show them to anyone! But it did inspire me to try again. Here is a petulant Nathaniel! Still love these books to peices
“Historically speaking, animating female characters are really, really difficult, ’cause they have to go through these range of emotions, but they’re very, very — you have to keep them pretty and they’re very sensitive to — you can get them off a model very quickly. So, having a film with two hero female characters was really tough, and having them both in the scene and look very different if they’re echoing the same expression; that Elsa looking angry looks different from Anna being angry.” — Lino Disalvo on animating Frozen, explaining (essentially) why they removed all the female supporting characters and replaced them with men. [[edited for accuracy]]
Yeah, I call bullshit.
don’t blame women because you’re a shitty animator
so basically what you’re saying is
"it was too harddddddd I didn’t wannaaaaaa."
"i dont care enough about women to animate them like reeeaaal peopleeee"
OK, wow, has this story ever changed in the game of Telephone that is Tumblr – this was never about replacing ‘all the female supporting characters’ in Frozen with men – the cast of the finished film is pretty much exactly the cast they started with. I was there for the development of two versions of the film and neither had any female supporting roles that were converted to male. If you’re talking about the Robber Girl from the original Andersen tale, a) if she was ever in the Disney version it had to have been years and years ago when it was but a glint in the studio’s eye and b) is there any other trace of the original story left, either?
When Lino made that comment originally, it was about the difficulty of pushing animation into a face which is designed to be pretty, a designation which depends on very specific and narrow parameters, which are easily transgressed. In the world of animation this has traditionally been one of the greatest challenges. (There is a story of Ollie Johnston, one of the greats of Disney’s original team, telling Glen Keane after seeing The Little Mermaid that the animation was nice but Ariel’s acting sometimes made her look ugly, so this attitude is far older than Lino.)
Female characters have the misfortune – injustice – of tending to be designed to be both fairly naturalistic (as opposed to cartoony) and ‘pretty,’ and thereby cutting out a huge amount of the variety and design potential inherent in the fairer sex. But that is a debate for another thread. It’s just as challenging to animate naturalistic/’pretty’ men without going off model, though there are far fewer – Prince Philip is a good one; one could argue for John Smith as well. I used to be of the opinion that acting is acting but then I saw a female character given ‘masculine’ expressions and yeah, it does look weird and wrong. That, however, is not a fault of female characters being haaaarrrrd in themselves, but of that particular animator not having the touch to put those same expressions on a female face without letting it slip into something that reads as male – but that is a skill that can be learned. So by all means the bullshit alarm was and should be rightly pulled on those comments: not because of character replacement which never happened, but because not learning how to do it right is just lazy.
And before anyone accuses me being partisan in this debate, I have no reason to defend Lino, in fact quite the opposite. I just can’t stand misinformation. His comments were poorly worded but were merely a reiteration of widely-known artisanal wisdom in animation, not explanation of storytelling decisions on the film.
Nice selection of screencaps, though, may there be many more!