Life comes in many flavours, and each day we face many questions. Some of these questions are judgements. And some of these judgements involve others in significant and meaningful ways. On the one hand, we seek to satisfy our personal needs -- self-determination -- while maintaining a sense of virtue -- compassion and justice. For many, there is too much injustice and suffering just to ignore. On the other hand, balancing the needs of us and them beckons honest appraisal of situations and people. But where and how should our finger be pointed?

Core psychology of blame

Among the very earliest struggles in a person's life is the process of ego development. In its simplest, ego is about separating good from bad, self from other. Various theories and models strive to explain the ego, or its development, from various perspectives. For the purposes here, I will be referencing object relations theory, which is part psychoanalytic psychology and deals with very early development, starting at birth. A few things will be slightly simplified to keep the text concise.
Within this theory, the first several months involve what is termed the paranoid-schizoid position. The "schizoid" aspect refers to a cognitive-emotional process known as splitting. This is where external objects, including people, are split into opposing mental parts -- to form part objects, or the "good object" version and the "bad object" version of each meaningful external object or phenomenon. For example, when the caregiver is gratifying to the infant, that part object is the "good caretaker"; and when not so gratifying, that caretaker is the "bad caretaker". At this stage of development and understanding, these two "part objects" are not seen as from the same source. Rather, each is a separate thing appearing and disappearing as circumstances and feelings change. The key word here is separation, which we will come back to later.
The other aspect of the paranoid-schizoid position -- the "paranoid" aspect -- refers to a curious side effect of splitting everything into "good" and "bad". Because each "part object" is either all good, or all bad, and because the appearance and disappearance of these mysterious entities is more-or-less out of control, the infant begins to resent and fear the bad objects that keep happening. That is, the baby hates the bad objects but loves the good objects. This is perhaps the very first stage of moral awareness -- raw, albeit mistaken judgement; love the good; hate the bad; pure, uninhibited attraction and repulsion. As a result, or side effect, of these negative or aggressive feelings toward "the bad", the baby may fear possible persecution, invoking paranoia. Strange though that may sound, there is a bit more to it.
Splitting, as between the mentioned "good" and "bad" objects, is only half the story. The other half of splitting is between "good self" and "bad self". That is, because in the paranoid-schizoid position, objects are temporary and impermanent, so too is the self temporary and fleeting. Moreover, the self is either in comfort, or in distress, giving either "good self" or "bad self" -- depending on circumstance. Since the "good self" appears with the "good object", and likewise the "bad self" with the "bad object", the child fears the appearance of the "bad object" even more. This is because its presence entails essentially collapse of the previous self-concept, as if to enter a realm of deserved persecution for being the "bad self" -- and hence the emergence of paranoia.
On an interesting aside, this manner of judging objects and selves as good or bad based solely on whether one is currently in comfort or pain is the essence of Stage 1 in Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development. This is a theory on the progression of individuals throughout life in moral reasoning. Stage 1, termed obedience and punishment orientation, judges those in trouble or pain as inherently bad. In many cases, this view basically blames the victim. Further, this type of reasoning is essentially the basis for the "might makes right" mindset seen in some cases of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD). One thing to keep in mind is that we all start there, but not everyone stays there. In this way, having crude moral reasoning later in life is effectively a sign of delayed or regressed development, much like a disability -- ie. "morally disabled".

Completing the person

Eventually, the child will reach a point in development where objects become whole and persistent, able to have simultaneously negative and positive qualities. Objects or people may take on accounts, or balances, allowing for consideration of simple reciprocity, including guilt and reparation. Self and caregiver become distinct entities, where "good" self is no longer lost each time caregiver is absent or busy. Assuming successful progression, blame and judgement is no longer split dichotically between two extremes. Otherwise a new type of splitting is come, where objects and entities, though whole and persistent, are either idealised or devalued.
An important key trend exists between consecutive steps of ego development. This is the trend of expanding persistence and relatedness. In the part-object stage, objects appear and vanish -- some good, some bad. These raw appearances are neither persistent, nor related. In the whole-object stage, objects become persistent, although at first not really related. Because of this initial lack of relation, the secondary type of splitting -- idealisation and devaluation -- is still likely. Basically, since one person or object is fundamentally unrelated to another, including the self, there is "no harm" in seeing one as all good, and another as all bad. Without a stabilising relation, moral judgements can be whimsical yet extreme. A person or object may alternate between being embraced and discarded, depending on present feelings or arrangements. But what makes a stabilising relation?
In general, stabilising relations develop naturally through observation and reason. For example, a caregiver may through time be taken as an intrinsic part of one's need for support. Or a sibling may eventually be seen as fundamentally similar and related. But the building of these relations, or attachments, can be hindered by certain experiences or feelings. For instance, an unstable or unavailable caregiver may leave a child feeling resentment, shame, or guilt. These feelings may then get in the way of building an emotional bond. The resulting lack of security, mixed with possible shame or guilt for not being good enough, may lead to maladaptive and unstable boundaries and self-definition. Some common results are narcissism and borderline personality -- the former as an escape mechanism from feelings of inadequacy, and the latter as unstable border-lines between what is embraced, and what is rejected. These early childhood misgivings can then live on subconsciously, infiltrating the psyche and its future engagements.

Competition and judgement

While the capacity for blame and hate may emerge, as described above, from fundamental urges of attraction and repulsion -- mixed with innate capacity for making inference -- there is another powerful instinct at play. Complex social animals have a built-in game of gene-selection and mate-selection. This game relies on a simple heuristic, or objective -- form competitive hierarchies, and select those at the top. The evolutionary assumption is that competition filters out less desirable code. Without reflection, this pre-configured notion may be taken at face value, often in fact elevated -- whether spoken or kept silent -- to something of religious adherence. But is the argument sound?
In simple times, back in the tribe, individuals tended to grow up closely-knit and fairly uniformly. Regardless which parents one had, pretty much everyone had access to the same quality of food, healthcare, and education. Tools and other amenities could readily be made or obtained by any abled body, often with only modest effort. As a result, there was, compared to modern times, an extremely even playing field. Very little interfered with the above premise that those who achieved success in social hierarchy likely had something special inside. Sure, luck still played a part, but that part was not only far less significant than today, but also far more visible for those of simple tribes. In probably most cases, everybody knew when someone had encountered bad fortune, as individual stories were less hidden.
In the current age, however, personal merit is vastly more obscured and mangled by deceptive forces. The range of disparity in childhood resources and care, the long duration of schooling needed to be competitive, and the sheer price of admission into money-making pursuits, completely destroy any legitimacy the heuristic of selection by social hierarchy may previously have had. Luck may have played a part back then, but today the part played by the lottery of placement into a particular family, time, and place is riddled with inequity. On top of all that, the behaviours and exploits that set one person atop the next are lost from sight through the complex labyrinth of time, legalese, and the unfathomable size of modern society. Hence, the basis of soundness behind judging merit on personal outcome is no longer something that can be supported with any honesty. To praise or blame based on social status and wealth is to partake in folly.

Entity and arrangement defined

Entities are mental objects, and their social accounts, pertaining to people, groups, aggregates, and other moral agents. I say mental objects for two basic reasons. One, individuals and groups change through time. As the saying goes:

"A person never steps into the same river twice; for on the second occasion, one is neither the same person, nor is it the same river" (paraphrased) ~ Heraclitus of Ephesus.

Two, while we may posit that physical substance seems to exist out there, beyond the mind, we nevertheless must work within our mental model, or worldview, when considering those entities and other things of material or mental reality. Hence, entities and objects can be cognised, or considered, solely as mental objects. This phenomenon of the mental becomes even more apparent when we consider the nature of not only being, but identity, character, and personal story. None of these, from what I can tell, can rightly be said to exist outside the mind. Each has arbitrary, situation-specific, and continually shifting boundaries and connotations.
Arrangements, in contrast, are sets of objects; entities; their relative positions; their internal configurations; and their relations and interactions. Arrangements are hence the frameworks in place either materially or logically between and within entities and or objects. Common examples include law, culture, contract, education, and social hierarchy -- but also the physical placement of people and things.
Not surprisingly, the arrangements in place have substantial influence on the outcomes for individuals and society. The same person lowered into two different cultures and circumstances can be expected to have a different time. Education, ideas, values, struggles, and relationships may all be completely changed. The combinations of butterfly effect, disparity of opportunity, and idiosyncratic accident leave open the door for a wide variety of possibility.

Splitting and blaming the entity

Before talking about what to blame, or how to blame it, we might consider some phenomena which may influence one's ability to make sound judgement. As discussed previously, early development can play a big part in both the way one perceives and understands the world, and also the way one feels about, and hence reacts to, situations and challenges within the world. So let us look at some such phenomena.
Splitting, in the post-infancy sense, is the viewing of mental objects -- including and especially people -- as either idealised all good, or devalued all bad. The primary hypothesis goes something along the lines that a child who felt insufficiently loved or attended during infancy and early childhood may develop an internalised sense of unworthiness -- perhaps shame or guilt. In simple terms, the child may internalise a judgement of "not good enough". Since early, particularly pre-linguistic experiences tend to be deeply-seated and hard-conditioned, the person later in life may not only have little if any recall of such experience, but likely has little ability to reflect or challenge the resulting feelings or cognitive distortions. Basically, the only remnant clearly visible may be the feelings and intuitions themselves -- sense of shame, guilt, and never being good enough. However, as with other inescapable negative feelings, the child or later person is prone to forming habits of escape. Most notably here, the person may partake in defence mechanisms, or unconscious patterns of perception and thinking that seek to turn off or escape uncomfortable or stressful cognitions.
Projection is among the most used defence mechanisms. It involves taking an unwanted feeling or judgement, and throwing it upon someone or something else. The idea is to distance oneself from such negative connotations. In the case of internalised shame or guilt of being "not good enough" during childhood, the person is likely to begin casting this judgement upon others. Unreasonable or unattainable standards may be adopted. The world itself may be viewed as inherently broken or untenable. In the case of splitting specifically, black-or-white, all-or-none thinking may be employed to polarise objects or people -- including oneself -- into all good or all bad -- idealisation or devaluation. This type of projection sorts others into something of angels and demons. Furthermore, as in borderline personality disorder, these dichotic judgements may switch regularly depending on current affairs. The key thing to remember here is that projection is done to escape unfaceable feelings or judgements about oneself. Use of this defence mechanism may shift blame from self to another, often in a way that is difficult or impossible for the user to see.
More broadly, splitting belongs to a class of phenomena known as cognitive distortions. In addition to all-or-none thinking, cognitive distortions include overgeneralising, disqualifying the positive, jumping to conclusions, exaggeration, perfectionism, personalisation, always being right, and labelling of others. Obviously these all have significant implications for how one judges others, and indeed how one places blame. For the discussion here, let us talk about one more of these.
Personalisation is when a person takes the blame personally, regardless what external factors may be at play. This style of attribution is inherently self-deprecatory. Alternatively, blame may be placed entirely on another person or group. The distortion here is not that blame is occurring, but that the object is always a conventional moral agent, such as a human or AI. Essentially, an individual with this style of attribution may have an irrational tendency to place blame on agents, rather than circumstances. The trick is understanding why this happens.
As it turns out, the psychology behind placing blame disproportionately on people and other agents, rather than arrangements, is driven by the instinct of social hierarchy. Like brought up earlier, people have a tendency to compare and compete, judging one another into hierarchies of better and worse -- more or less worthy. The more insecure a person feels, or the more internalised shame or sense of inadequacy one has, the more the person may be compelled to cast blame on others. Put simply, insecurity activates the instinct of social hierarchy.
There are some noteworthy side effects to the habit of blaming the agent. One is scapegoating, or the projection of a group's fears and insecurities onto an external object. In scapegoating, the object chosen is often little, if at all, related to the underlying problem or dysfunction. Rather, the group seeks to unload its insecurity onto an unlucky target. This behaviour is much like that done in narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). One might say that groups too, not just people, can have NPD. One common target of scapegoating is minorities, of pretty much any type, who are often blamed for internal inadequacies of the majority regime. Another side effect of blaming the agent is kicking the dog, or chain reactions of blame shifting where each rung of the social hierarchy blames the next rung, all the way to the dog. Similar to scapegoating, kicking the dog picks a target generally unable to defend itself. This style of attribution, moreover, is contagious within organisations, hindering legitimate consideration of how the true underlying issues can best be resolved.

False object of blame

A curious distortion of interest is blindly taking the mental as fact. In the extreme, there is a phenomenon known as psychic equivalence. This is common in children, where the imagined monster under the bed is believed surely to exist. The line between mental and external is still thin. While most older individuals are beyond such explicit equivalence, we nevertheless have no other option for understanding reality than what our mind beholds. Whether for positive or negative, when we see or imagine someone, we are never seeing the real person. What we witness is our mental model, or mental object, of the other. The same goes for their view of us. When they behold us, they are really beholding someone else -- a construct of their imagination. Likewise, when we judge or blame another, we are really blaming someone else -- a monster of our own creation. Sometimes it can help to remember that in our mental, we are all mental.

Another defence mechanism

Aside from cognitive distortions, another key issue stands in the way of finding truth. In order to resolve deeply-seated emotional baggage, that baggage has to be opened. Yet doing so can be both painful and confusing. The mind has another trick up its sleeve to avoid facing the rain -- intellectualisation. Many have heard of rationalisation, or the making up of good-sounding stories to explain otherwise irrational or emotion-based actions and choices. Intellectualisation is related, but distinct. Instead of making up stories to seem more rational, intellectualisation makes up complex frameworks and red herrings to distract oneself and others from getting too close to the underlying feeling. Just like for splitting, the usual root cause is believed to be insecure attachment during infancy and early childhood. The result, especially later in life, is the excessive overreliance on logic and complex frameworks to avoid looking inside toward emotion. Reason becomes a comfortable hideout from hideous feeling. This disposition prevents proper reflection, making it hard or impossible to stop idealising and devaluing others. After all, one cannot stop spilling pain until one finds the source of that pain.

Relation to free will

The notion of free will comes in many definitions. These can get technical. But one fairly common theme is what they seek to support -- often some type of personal, or entity-centric, responsibility or blame. Regardless whether logically sound, the pursuit is in many cases a rationalisation of the instinctual and emotional urges of social hierarchy and ego defence. Essentially, many debates about free will are really struggles, or disagreements, on the nature of blame, and to where it should aim. In general, the belief in free will -- regardless the definition chosen -- is argued in support of some type of entity attribution. Likewise, the disbelief in free will is usually argued in support of system attribution, or blaming the way society or culture is structured. A person may choose a definition specifically to assert the desired end -- a psychological phenomenon called motivated reasoning. This text will avoid choosing a definition, as the underlying principles of behaviour are more important.
A less known paradox exists within the bounds of psychological agency. As is regularly discussed in certain circles of spirituality, there exists a spectrum of self-boundary between immediate, local, relative and timeless, non-local, absolute. This mental state of contraction or expansion depends in part on the grasping or release of fear and attachment. For those unfamiliar, the felt sense of personal agency -- sometimes called doership -- and one's associated beliefs about personal causation, are prone to change, or shift, depending on the present level of anxiety -- especially social and existential anxiety. There are two key aspects related to the sense of being in control.
The first aspect of interest is that of causal scope, or how far we trace the causes and influences behind any given event or decision. For example, as I type this, among the most immediate, or smallest causal scopes, is that of my finger pressing a key. Moving toward greater scope, we may consider that the arm is moving the finger. Further, of course, one might say the body is doing the typing. But the scope need not end there. We can trace back through the causal chains, finding all manner of influence. After all, why do I care about this? What social factors and life experiences influenced this cause? The more immediate the causal scope, the longer and more encumbered the causal chains. Hence, even though when afraid we may focus on the more immediate, hence feeling more in direct control, the more our felt boundaries of self and causality contract, the more short-sighted, distracted, and materially-bound we are. The paradox is in the inverted pyramid of influence atop our actions.
The second aspect relates to impulse and desire versus self-control and composure. Human desire may be divided broadly into basic animal instinct and social image. In Freudian terms, these would be id and ego. The former is often viewed as impulsive or animalistic; the latter as controlled and composed. A meaningful portion of pro-free will arguments seems to equate or compare the composure and planning of socially-conscious actions and choices as representative of the essence of "free will". That is, more "controlled" or deliberate actions were exercising greater free will than their more impulsive or animalistic counterparts. But is this assessment sensible?
On the one hand, being more socially aware likely helps to prevent being manipulated or impeded by others. Most would probably agree thus far. But on the other hand, the more we care about fitting in, or otherwise playing the game of social hierarchy, the more we submit ourselves to social norms and other hive behaviours. Essentially, the more we care about image, the more we let society control us. Despite this emotional tether, those with the biggest egos often proclaim the greatest sense of self-determination. Certainly one could argue that being on top of the hierarchy usually entails greater access to social amenities, some of which offering greater freedom. But there may be some right reservations here. Firstly, the enhanced freedom of high status often comes with enhanced fitment and scrutiny into the externally-defined social mould. This is not always the case, as for example with dictators. But secondly, the vast majority of those playing the ego game are neither in positions of status and power, nor emotionally secure enough to go their own way toward personal happiness. Perhaps most prominently, for most social animals, the hive provides only minimal amenity, and maximal loss of autonomy. Yet the internalised ego and self-concept obscure this reality by making cultural, emotional artifacts of socialisation -- especially during childhood -- appear as self-chosen. The person is thus a product of upbringing, but because these aspects of conditioning are so deep and unconscious, their effects are simply taken for granted as part of who one is. Hence, a second paradox exists in that what may appear as evidence for free will -- ego and composure -- is in fact the very thing enacting the long-seated will of the hive.
On a different note of the free will debate, there seems to be a phenomenon somewhat like "free will of the gaps", where any unknown of psychology or physics is received wholeheartedly as evidence for freedom. While no doubt one may never really know, particularly when stuck in the subjective mind-box, one might consider the effect of splitting, or black-and-white thinking. This habit may, without enough reflection, colour one's assessment of personal agency as either wholly existing, or wholly absent. This is not to say undue burden and other explicit interference is unregarded, but more that even the mere existence of randomness or unpredictability may be taken as sufficient reason to ward off the behavioural influences and effects known by modern psychology. Remember that splitting is driven by egoic insecurity, and that ego has vested interest in building the narrative which best places oneself in the social hierarchy of the mind. Impulsive or controlled, what we choose is there to satisfy instinct, whether animalistic, or socially-focused.

Blaming the arrangement

On the other side of inferred causation -- after instinct -- we have experience, conditioning, and circumstance. Experience and conditioning are carry-overs from past arrangement while circumstance reflects the present arrangement. For simplicity, I will place all three simply under arrangement. To borrow from earlier:

Arrangements ... are sets of objects; entities; their relative positions; their internal configurations; and their relations and interactions. Arrangements are hence the frameworks in place either materially or logically between and within entities and or objects. Common examples include law, culture, contract, education, and social hierarchy -- but also the physical placement of people and things.

With this definition in mind, what then does it mean to blame the arrangement, and what benefit does so doing provide?
First, let us consider the standard Western approach. When we blame the entity, we are accomplishing three fundamental ends:

1. declaring a point of causal significance;
2. downgrading social status;
3. offloading correction;

On the first point, blaming the entity cuts off past influences, including deficiencies and inequalities in access to essential resources like health, respect, education, and experience. One might wonder why respect is included here. But remember the types of issue that arise from internalised shame, guilt, and feelings of inadequacy. These live on subconsciously, causing non-obvious impairments in judgement and performance. Plus they harm health and performance through elevated stress hormones.
On the second point, blaming the entity lowers its public appraisal, thus cutting off access to the types of resources just mentioned.
On the third point, blaming the entity places the burden of correction squarely on the already broken component. For simple matters like enforcing social norms or decency, this type of blame is probably effective in most cases. But when we start looking at bigger matters, like health, education, intelligence, self-restraint, and general performance, the idea of forcing the suboptimal party to fix itself starts to break down. All these matters are heavily influenced by external circumstance through time. So telling the person to fix the resulting dysfunction is like telling them to rewrite their past environment, including their upbringing. Moreover, those from broken pasts are much more often the least supplied -- in both resource and knowhow -- to make things better.
And this brings us to blaming the arrangement. If instead of burdening and downgrading the unfortunate entity, we recognise the conditions of success and failure, we can apply legitimate effort toward enacting a better future. Obviously society as a whole is far better equipped to improve not only the outcome of tomorrow, but the conditions of today. Some of us, by chance, receive the winning hand. This may be in genetics, family configuration, area of schooling, or maybe just missing detrimental accidents and injuries. What sense does it make to hoard the helpings of fate, thus preventing the wealth of shared development and growth? In a world literally brimming with technological advancement, is it really better for the majority to live polarised as minority winners and majority losers?

Arguments

One might argue that blame and praise are natural and effective tools for motivation and modification of behaviour. Natural though they may be, these tools are premised on the limited knowledge and resources of tribal past. Like using a hammer to insert a screw, messy tools ought to be reserved for desperate times only. Modern medicine, psychology, and sociology offer a new toolbox, today readily available, for resolving problems with minimal collateral damage. True, not everyone has fair access to these modern amenities, and that is exactly why we need to stop blaming the victim. The technology is here. We simply need to open the gates.
Another common argument is that absent of pointing fingers, people would lose motivation, or stop caring. There may be some truth here. If we remove the whip from their backs, the slaves may begin to relax. But is that really a bad thing? Per-capita material output is already worlds higher due to automation and tooling. But artificial scarcity is brought in to "keep up the morale". This scarcity is largely in the form of wealth and income inequality, which ensure the true producers of wealth -- the workers -- are kept chasing their imagined carrot. The effect, in practice, is burnout and learned helplessness. The secondary effect is thus decreased performance, which is then "solved" with ever greater artificial scarcity, perpetuating the cycle of lies and suffering. Instead of entertaining a system of slavery with extra steps, why not more equally distribute the tools and technology of efficiency and success?
A darker argument that occasionally gets said out loud is that excessive competition and suffering help to weed out the less desirable traits. Often, it is proclaimed, nature wanted it that way. Ignoring the obvious lack of compassion, is this argument sound? The simple answer is no. The longer answer is not even a little. There are two main reasons. Firstly, the dirty game of filtering by social hierarchy was not only sloppy for its original environment of small tribes, but is completely unfit for modern, complex, abstract society. As explained previously, the legitimacy of individual merit is no longer known by fellow tribespeople. Wealth generation and extraction are too far removed and abstracted for proper outside judgement. And complex systems of power and propaganda further prevent equitable distribution of the fruits of labour. Secondly, the amount of time needed for such mechanisms of trait filtering to make an appreciable difference are substantially longer than the time from now before technology will allow superior selection of traits. There will be no need to compete in the sloppy ways of the past; nor any need to compete at all. The problem of selection is soon resolved. AI is entering the exponential phase. Petty and primitive worry about traits is irrelevant, for multiple reasons. If anything, those unable to understand this are unfit to be making policy decisions.
An argument which comes up enough to mention is that without blaming the entity, criminals would have free reign, able to do whatever they wanted without repercussions. This argument is missing something quite substantial about what is entailed by blaming the arrangement. Simply, if a certain person is believed to lack the self-control for certain situations or positions, that person will be kept away from those circumstances. A common example is driver's licensing, where one must earn the privilege by proving competence. And similarly to that, if someone is blatantly acting out and causing trouble, obviously they would be put somewhere safer. The key is rearranging circumstances as needed for best outcome while maintaining reasonable maximum personal autonomy -- without unnecessary harm, restraint, or loss of dignity. Yes, this is more involved in terms of resources and labour, but that is what technology is for. Naturally people prefer to have more privilege, and that alone is motivation enough to care.
And before someone accuses this approach of being or supporting a social credit system, we must make clear the difference. In social credit systems, blame is placed on the individual ! Sure, the factors used may involve family and acquaintance, but the burden of correction still goes to the person or small group. This is completely different from what is being proposed here.
A final argument relates to expense. On the surface -- especially from within the perspective of a system based on artificial scarcity and excessive wealth inequality -- the idea of having surplus means available for long-term planning may seem unfathomable. People's reluctance in this regard can be understood. But as mentioned above, we are presently, for presumably the first time in our recorded history, entering the age of exponential growth toward advanced artificial intelligence. Things are moving fast already, and both hardware and software are showing no slowing. If computational capacity continues to double regularly like it has for a long time now, we are probably looking at readily accessible post-human intelligence within five to ten years. Short of disaster or tyrannical interference, existing worries about labour and intellect shortage should soon evaporate. Yes, this time things are different. There is no known precedent.

Summary

Our natural instinct may tell us to blame the person. And Western culture may polarise this tendency to the extreme. But with a little understanding of why we feel the need to downsize others, we may be able to mend the splitting within us. Society may be designed around a game of hierarchy, but one need not partake. By knowing the factors that promote or inhibit wellbeing, and by using the knowledge and tools of modern, we can cast off the shallow assumptions behind us, to build something worth keeping. The first step is looking inside, to see the feeling that fears connection. Then we may look outside, to see that most are facing similar struggle. Situations are what make or break the person. If one should blame, blame the arrangement. The past may not be one for changing, but greater compassion today can find greater love tomorrow.

few months ago i was introduced to a co-worker who has a crush on me. at the time (and still in the present) i am trying to get over my last relationship. i told him as well as the coworker that introduced us that i was in no way shape or form even interested in a relationship and trying to hook me up with someone was absolutely out of the question. very early on into meeting this coworker i told him i just wanted to be friends. he agreed and so i felt more comfortable hanging out with him. but that whole friends thing went in one ear and out the other for both coworkers.
however, even after i told him i just wanted to be friends, he is still attached at my hip. he follows me around work and it’s draining my energy. he asks me to hang out every single day even after i’ve answered “no” for a month straight. i used to agree to it bc i was just being nice but i can’t do it anymore. i miss my alone time, playing games, listening to music, reading comics and skateboarding by myself. i work and go to school full time, even coming home just feels like a casual kick back with my family because all i have time to do when i’m home is eat and sleep for a few hours.
the first time we hung out still lingers in my mind because someone had shattered his window and my intuition was telling me something was off. his energy is just anxiety inducing to me and i can’t explain in words exactly why.
a few times i’ve clocked out of work and his car is parked next to mine. one of this instances he was paying attention to his phone and i was able to start my car and leave. of course he noticed i was leaving but i didn’t stay to have conversation with him. i knew what he was going to ask and just ran away. he would also wait in his car for my lunch break and it’s gotten to the point i can’t park where i used to because even him approaching me stresses me out.
another time i hid behind some baby strollers in my dept. because i knew he would approach me, as he does every shift, and i waited for him to leave before i came out of hiding. in case he found me, i was scanning items to make it seem like i was working instead of waiting for him to leave.
this situation is concerning to me because he sent me a text a week ago saying he missed me and he knows “i don’t see myself in the best light” and cried for me because i seem exhausted. this was after i rejected his valentines confession (after i said i wanted to be strictly friends). he bought me expensive gifts and all i could think was that he could’ve used this money for himself, literally anything else but me.
maybe i’m just being sensitive, but i don’t like when someone assumes my feelings for me. i am exhausted. i work full time and also go to school full time but that doesn’t mean i’m miserable or i hate myself for my situation. i’m proud of myself.
a couple times he’s asked me why go to school when i could just work. after i told him that i needed time away from work he says “but i don’t get to see you anymore if you go to school” which led to him begging me to hang out with him.
am i being dramatic? i’ve thought maybe i’m over exaggerating the entire situation, maybe it’s just because he’s still a kid, maybe he’s just insanely stubborn and he hopes one day i’m just going to be with him at the drop of a hat. but no matter how many times i make it so obviously clear i don’t want his presence in my life , he just doesn’t understand. i don’t know what to do, i don’t want to plaster the label “stalker” onto him because… well, i don’t know.

According to our (Global Info Research) latest study, the global Disposable Linear Stapler market size was valued at USD million in 2022 and is forecast to a readjusted size of USD million by 2029 with a CAGR of % during review period. The influence of COVID-19 and the Russia-Ukraine War were considered while estimating market sizes.
This report is a detailed and comprehensive analysis for global Disposable Linear Stapler market. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses are presented by company, by region & country, by Type and by Application. As the market is constantly changing, this report explores the competition, supply and demand trends, as well as key factors that contribute to its changing demands across many markets. Company profiles and product examples of selected competitors, along with market share estimates of some of the selected leaders for the year 2023, are provided.
Request Free Sample Copy at:
https://www.globalinforesearch.com/reports/1263528/disposable-linear-stapler
Key Features: Global Disposable Linear Stapler market size and forecasts, in consumption value ($ Million), 2018-2029 Global Disposable Linear Stapler market size and forecasts by region and country, in consumption value ($ Million), 2018-2029 Global Disposable Linear Stapler market size and forecasts, by Type and by Application, in consumption value ($ Million), 2018-2029 Global Disposable Linear Stapler market shares of main players, in revenue ($ Million), 2018-2023 The Primary Objectives in This Report Are: To determine the size of the total market opportunity of global and key countries To assess the growth potential for Disposable Linear Stapler To forecast future growth in each product and end-use market
Market segmentation Disposable Linear Stapler market is split by Type and by Application. For the period 2018-2029, the growth among segments provide accurate calculations and forecasts for consumption value by Type and by Application. This analysis can help you expand your business by targeting qualified niche markets.
Market segment by Type Double-handle Single-handle
Market segment by Application Hospitals Clinics Ambulatory Surgical Centers
Market segment by players, this report covers Johnson & Johnson Medtronic Grena Welfare Medical Avental EVOMED Panther Healthcare Medical Equipment Frankenman (Boston Scientific) Touchstone Reach (Genesis Medtech) David Medical Victor Medical Instruments XNY Medical Lepu Medical Waston Changzhou Haiers Changzhou Ankang Ezisurg Medical Fengh Medical Zhejiang Geyi Medical Instrument CITEC
Report Chapters
Chapter 1, to describe Disposable Linear Stapler product scope, market overview, market estimation caveats and base year. Chapter 2, to profile the top manufacturers of Disposable Linear Stapler, with price, sales, revenue and global market share of Disposable Linear Stapler from 2018 to 2023. Chapter 3, the Disposable Linear Stapler competitive situation, sales quantity, revenue and global market share of top manufacturers are analyzed emphatically by landscape contrast. Chapter 4, the Disposable Linear Stapler breakdown data are shown at the regional level, to show the sales quantity, consumption value and growth by regions, from 2018 to 2029. Chapter 5 and 6, to segment the sales by Type and application, with sales market share and growth rate by type, application, from 2018 to 2029. Chapter 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11, to break the sales data at the country level, with sales quantity, consumption value and market share for key countries in the world, from 2017 to 2022.and Disposable Linear Stapler market forecast, by regions, type and application, with sales and revenue, from 2024 to 2029. Chapter 12, market dynamics, drivers, restraints, trends, Porters Five Forces analysis, and Influence of COVID-19 and Russia-Ukraine War. Chapter 13, the key raw materials and key suppliers, and industry chain of Disposable Linear Stapler. Chapter 14 and 15, to describe Disposable Linear Stapler sales channel, distributors, customers, research findings and conclusion.
About report customization:
The Global Information Research Department can customize the report according to your needs. The report can be personalized to meet your requirements. Please contact our sales team, they will ensure that you can get a report that suits your needs.
Global Info Research is a report publisher, a customer, interest-based suppliers. Is in the best interests of our clients, they determine our every move. At the same time, we have great respect for the views of customers. With the improvement of the quality of our research, we develop custom interdisciplinary and comprehensive solution. For further development, we will do better and better. Global Info Research will with excellent professional knowledge and experience to carry out all aspects of our business. At the same time, we will thoroughly look for information, to give a more comprehensive development.
Global Info Research
E-mail:[email protected]
Add:FLAT/RM A 9/F SILVERCORP INTERNATIONAL TOWER 707-713 NATHAN ROAD MONGKOK KL HONG KONG
Website:http://www.globalinforesearch.com

Some ideas aside from the basics of pots/pants, nice sheets/towels, etc.
- Fat Tire Bikes
- Portable Crib, Ikea High Chair, Jogging Stroller
- Paddle Boards
- Fishing Poles
- Hiking Sticks
- Nespresso machine and nice Yeti Coffee mugs to sit on balconies
- Fondue Maker
- Greenegg Smoker
- Selection of Board Games and Playing Cards
- TVs's in every room and a playstation in the Kid's room
- Novels and Puzzles
- Solo Fire Stove + Lounge Chairs
-Outdoor games: driveway tennis, basketball, football, soccer ball

Hello all! Still a leo newbie, after doing some reading on my own, I figured I’d double check here!
Just got our little baby in January, “secondhand”, and we were told she’d be a year old in March.
She was eating as much as I’d give her to start. Mix of meal worms, crickets, and dubias, following the “2 appropriately sized insects per inch of length” guide I’d found.
Just recently though, she’s been refusing to eat when offered via tongs, and barely eating when I leave them in her dish for later.
She’s also been choosing her half log hide over her humid hide more. She was HUGELY into her humid hide before.
She’s still acting the same though, aside from those two things, and seems to have fully warmed up to me now. Comes out of her hide to see me and has been climbing into my hand when I offer it.
She also doesn’t seem to be losing any weight. Nor do I see signs of impaction or being egg bound.
I read that sometimes they go through a stubborn phase when they mature, but that seems to be at 18 months, not 12.
Could it just be that I was misinformed of her age when we got her? Or do you think there’s something else going on??
Any insight would be appreciated!
Oh! And she’s in a 20 gallon, heating pad under the hot side, daytime heat lamp (white, not red or blue), temperatures/humidity are kept in the suggested ranges, multiple hides, faux plants, with a mix of carpet, moss, and safely sized stones for her bedding. (Working on figuring out a possibly bioactive setup)

TEAM BLUE💙🔵
🌟🔵POKEMON GO LEVEL 48 ACCOUNT🔵🌟
🌟 COLLECTOR ACCOUNT 🌟
🌟NO WARNING 🌟
🌟XP :- 158,215,52🌟
🌟DUST:- 8,882,279+🌟
POKEMON STORAGE :- 1300
ITEM STORAGE :- 1150
💙SPECIAL HIGHLIGHTED POKEMON’S 💙 🔵🔵🔵
🔵🌟 COSTUME SHINY LIBRA PIKACHU 🌟🔵
🔵🌟 COSTUME MEWTWO 🌟🔵
🔵🌟 COSTUME SHINY MEWTWO 🌟🔵
🔵🌟 SHINY BABY TYROGUE 🌟🔵
🔵🌟 LUCKY SHINY MEWTWO 🌟🔵
🔵🌟 SHINY SHUNDO 🌟🔵
🔵🌟 SALANDIT (LADY) 🌟🔵
⭐ HIGHLIGHTED INFO⭐
➡️(112) Shiny & 100IV Pokemons✨
➡️ (01) Double Charge Moves Pokemon’s (pvp specials)
➡️(34) Legendary & Shiny Pokemon’s ✨
➡️(748) Shiny Pokemon’s ✨
➡️(47) Mewtwo Pokemon's
➡️(11) Costume Shiny ✨ Buddy Pokemon's
❄️💠FEST EXCLUSIVE POKEMONS💠❄️
💥Meloetta💥
💥victini💥
💥Jirachi💥
💙🌟🌟SPECIAL POKEMONS 🌟🌟💙
➡️(04) Riolu Pokemon's
➡️(146) Costume & Shiny Pokemon’s ✨
➡️(01) Shiny✨ Rufflet (rare)
➡️(07) Shiny✨ Ditto (rare) : One lucky shiny
➡️(17) Baby Shiny✨ (All babies except tyrogue)
➡️(05) Shiny✨ shinx (Costume rare)
➡️(04) Lucky Shiny ✨ Pokemon's
➡️(02) Meltan Pokemon's
💥OTHER POKEMONS INFO💥
➡️(12) Best Buddies 💙💙
➡️(116) Legendary Pokemon’s
➡️(08) Lucky + Legendary Pokemon’s
➡️(150) Special Pokemon’s
➡️(345) 100IV Pokemon’s
➡️(04) Mythical Shiny ✨ Pokemon’s
➡️(25) Mythical Pokemon’s
➡️(21) Xl Pokemon’s
➡️(33) Hatched Pokemon’s
➡️(05) 100IV Legendary Pokemon’s
➡️(07) Lucky Hatched Pokemon’s
➡️(02) PVP Pokemon's
➡️(967) Great League Pokemon's
➡️(52) Shiny ✨ Unown Pokemon's
➡️(27) Shadow Pokemon's
➡️(31) Purified Pokemon's
💙🌟 OTHER ITEMS 🌟💙
➡️(06) ELITE FAST TM ⭐ ➡️(66) FAST TM ⭐ ➡️(208) RARE CANDIES ⭐ ➡️(66) RARE CANDIES XL ⭐ ➡️(96) CHARGED TM ⭐
FOR MORE DETAILED INFORMATION CLICK ON THE LINK GIVEN BELOW :- Pokemon Go Stacked Account Level 48 💙🔵 (Part 1) :- https://imgur.com/a/YkK3OWj
Pokemon Go Stacked Account Level 48 💙🔵 (Part 2) :- https://imgur.com/a/tTmNGyk
------------------------------------------------—————————————————
PAYMRNT METHOD :- PAYPAL G&S ACCEPTED TRANSFER WISE

I finally get to graduate from pregnancy tomorrow morning! Having a C-section due to some health reasons and also because my kid is measuring over 10 pounds and my doctor is wanting to make sure I don’t suffer any birth trauma. But as I’m sitting here double checking my bag and getting last minute things done, I’m also scrolling through Instagram and TikTok. Does anyone else feel so overwhelmed with all the products and videos of “things I wish I knew…”? I already have anxiety and I finally had to put my phone down because all this extra content is making it worse. Like I’m already scared that I don’t have everything “ready” for her but I know that I have a great support system around me to help. Even knowing that, I’m still overthinking everything that I’ve bought and getting overwhelmed.
Does anyone else have these same feelings? And for those who did and have already given birth, how did you feel after baby finally arrived?

i should probably preface this with its not only am i ridiculously and comedically easy to please with media but im also a huge lesbian and i like inhale any rep as long as it isnt straight out offensive. my opinion is very piased and i know. i feel like posting a mini opinion analysis of the comic because im a clown and pretend my opinion is invaluable (not really, just knew the sub virulently hated it when it dropped so figured it would be fun to see how ppl took my commentary). i have also been a fan of twdg since year of our lord 2012 when i was eight. and finally this will be an actual mess because its 12 am and im just spouting my opinions bc i need to talk about it with someone.
i think. okay i dont think this is a good Canon continuation. i will not be refering to it as canon when i look back on the series. obviously clem just straight up ditching aj is the most glaring issue here. why the fuck would they do that? its pretty baffling. i guess aj is a difficult character to write especially with the fandoms tendency to see kid characters as annoying... i feel like the worst way they fucked up here was the cold opening with her just ditching aj. i personally believe clem is a character who could DO some soul searching. like, shes been spending the last 6 years hardly living for herself but someone else! if she was like "yo ericsons i need a couple momths to go out there and fuck around while i know aj is safe" i would get that i think? but just her completely DITCHING THEM FOREVER.... BRO.
but viewing it, purely as just Another Wacky Clementine Adventure, taking place on some parallel timeline where she didnt have aj or maybe she found out aj was better off at the ranch or this is an au fanfic or SOMETHING... i think its okay. no literary masterpiece but i had my fun with it and i dont think its a massive disgrace to the series or anything. pretty compelling plot, What the fuck is up with this mountain. i enjoyed it mostly. i think the fact that i have read a lot of twdg fanfic in my day loosened me up, ive seen way worse plots than this.
i actually really liked the over all lighter tone in the book, it was a REALLY good change of pace honestly. like of course its the apocalypse people are dying its fucking HORRIBLE but we dont really get to see enough of them being human. and i guess its way harder to put in game form because youd need to devote a lot of time to working out all those scenes in different art forms when you can just draw them in a comic. just being able to see all the little things that wouldnt have been put into the game was very heartwarming. i think my favorite part was them reading the shitty romance novel but because they havent had schooling since 3rd grade ricca had to flip through the dictionary shit made me laugh way too hard unfortunately
since theyre the two capital M Main deuteragonists ill probably only talk abt amos and ricca. i dont have big opinions on right and left except damn twins are fucking cursed in this series arent they? also i wanna know more what was so unhinged about their family. why do they have a plane why are they rich why is there a bunch of people at their house whyyyyyy i would have put this in the things that bugged me but its probably book 2 material so ill forget that.
i think the best part about this book is amos. hes so funny. sunshine boy. i think him and clems spongebob and squidward dynamic at the beginning was so adorable i just enjoy seeing her LIVE you know? i lived for the fun and casual moments in s4 too. i miss him so much he was the best little amish boy ever. i think the tonal shift when he died was actually really fucking good. the real world hits for everyone like it just did for him except hes not around to see it anymore. im not a fan of the series "SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST THE WEAK FUCKING DIE EAT SHIT IF YOU ARE SCARED OR A CHILD OR BOTH" (its not that bad i know im joking) sometimes though so im glad it wasnt so hammered in with amos. his death was something that could have happened to Anyone, you know? sure you can say he was on that mountain in the first place bc he was so innocent but so was clem.
ricca seems. very devisive aka people fucking hate her wow. im an annoying lesbian so like girl same i guess 😭 thats probably why i enjoyed her so much. look i think i get why people dont like her. i dont think there was enough to really set her apart from say violet as a romance option - dry sarcastic lesbian oh boy! but i think theres enough where its like, passable. you can tell theyre meant to be different. it was very funny to me how she just came in blasting oh she is GAY gay huh. but also definitely threw me off a good bit... keep the jokester part dial down the flirting a little. like louis' introduction. i think they definitely either should have been more subtle abt it for readability OR doubled down on the down catastrophic because it would have been funny but please never fucking call clem baby again girl you arent even dating yet.
there was definitely shit that bugged me though. first of all clementine just fucking throwing herself down the pit when ricca got pulled in by the generator. if you stretch the belief a little bit you could say oh yeah she knew the canyon wasnt you will fucking die deep bc they were lowering the generator which is like i guess but they were just talking about how deep it was like 3 seconds before? i thought for sure ricca was dead and clem just. DID THAT lmao. anyways how did they not hear the walkers at the bottom how did they not see the bottom how was it that dark.............
the second that kinda bugged me: okay i kind of get clem not knowing the zombies are underneath the snow and theyll come back when the mountain thaws but its weird that the story acts like she doesnt know walkers slow down in the cold. like this was a semi relevant plot point in season 2 wasnt it or am i just overly attached to these games and remember too much.
EDIT: okay i completely forgot about this part while writing this at first, but i was also super upset about the omg i left ericsons they thought i was a burden thing. like.... girl you are clementine they dont think that. it would be interesting if they took that idea and it turns out that was only clementine projecting - it finally sinks in that she can live and shes freaking out because of that so she leaves and tries to justify it to herself when its just her pushing others away again, and she tries to do it again later in the series but manages to break the cycle. i think going into clems traumatized brain is a very worth it thing to do, so i like the stark differences between her and the others at first because shes SEEN major shit. i hope they touch on it more later on
also speaking of things that bugged people but not me specifically -- apparently people read all the cannibalism hints as having been dropped at the end. that wasnt really how it clicked for me though maybe it went over my head? i just assumed cannibalism still happened on the mountain but olivia just isnt There yet in explaining all what happened and the other characters know prying is kinda fucked. ok EDIT END
im gonna say the ending kinda. left me wanting more. again not as a canon continuation but just something to have fun with? like i said about parallel universe timelines or whatever... make it like opt in canon. id be fine with that and seeing more of the story presented here in an isolated storyline. also plane holy shit PLANES. i wanna see more about post apocalyptic towns and societies too. anf baited me with that and i wanna know MOREEEEEEEEEEE. it also felt a little bit rushed as were the beginninv portions with amos and clem -- i wanna know more of the specifics!! flesh that shit out please especially if it involves them having fun.
sooo yeah thats my opinions on it i guess! you dont have to agree at all i just wondered if ppl were curious abt seeing the opinions of someone who enjoyed it. i know you guys avoid it like the plague and i think thats fair because again, bastardization of canon especially with clem and aj. i dont think you have to like it as a continuation to Like something you know? and a final apology for this being a soggy mess. i love mobile <3

The news was out, and everyone gathered their forces to ask why, when, and who did it. Terror struck five Jewish teens on a night of vacant freedom. It was a force that everyone expected, a source that still came suddenly though. However, when articles and headlines showed up on many people's pages, it was clear then. Everyone suspected some form of sudden violence to occur on Saturday night, but as news passed on, the sheer horror was slowly coming within one of the students at the university, and no one knew who. All they knew is that many of them didn’t have anything important to say about it when many people posted about it on their accounts; not to make people aware of the matter but instead to be relieved that they were not violent as people who cause harm. Thus, as Nick made his way back to his dorm, holding his new parking permit in a yellow envelope, he remembered his friend Josh was back at this time. He took time to finish his homework at the library and when he was done thinking about it he was well pleased to enter his dorm room.
I opened the yellow envelope on my desk. My friend, Josh, was sitting on his bed reading off the messages that he’s been getting since this morning; his new friends have made him comfortable to stay in the dorm for today since they were speaking about the gathering last night. Of course, I was curious to see what they were planning since Josh and his friends don’t feel like going.
“What time do you plan to go to the gathering?”, Josh asks. His white skin, and blonde hair, match the glowing tangerine of this rising evening. And around 8, I plan to be at a little party happening down in the thick suburbs.
“I'm not sure”, I say, but cautiously ask, “Why? Do you need to be somewhere?”. Before Josh can answer I quickly say, “Because I could walk, it's no problem”. Josh then says strictly, “No way, I'm just making sure you get there in time”.
I glance at Josh and chuckle, “To be frank, I'm a little nervous to meet these guys”, I say.
“The guys will like you once you meet them, I promise”, Josh says.
I glanced around for a pen to mark my new parking permit that was in the envelope for this semester. “alright then”, I say and add, “You don’t think they’ll notice my nervousness?”.
“I'm sure they will like you. Trust me, I was feeling hesitant when I first joined but I got along before I knew them”.
I look back at my desk and start checking off the boxes on my permit. Feeling the thin sharpness of the paper grace against my fingertip, seeing it under my lamp.
“You just seem worried”, I say gently.
Josh looks at his phone when another message comes in. He reads it fast before saying, “It’s what happened to those boys that worries me”.
“The Jews?”, I say hesitantly.
“Yeah, It's just a bit unnerving right now. Like this is something I'm supposed to be feeling”, Josh says quietly, then adds, “I'm just worried we might end up exactly like them”.
“We're not Jews though”, I say.
“I know, but do you think they care?”, Josh says deeply.
“Sometimes”, he begins, “I get dreams where I'm them after hearing about it on my phone. And I can feel the bullet, or knife go in me, and I wake up sweating”.
Josh sits up a bit, reaching for his charger, and continues, “I get the feeling that one day we’ll be like them. In the nightmare, I was them: the same body, same teeth, same hair, and same fear of sensing danger breathing nearby in some dark street. All the students didn’t look when the darkness around me struck like a knife. Like a bullet breaking through my skull.
Dead, alone, and slowly dying in the dark streets without having no one take a peek at how much pain I was in. And I do wonder when that will be, if not now”.
I look out the window, seeing the sun go down over the horizon, and say without looking at Josh, “Sometimes that’s what dreams do. You probably have been reading too many articles about it”.
Josh then stands over his bed now and grabs his keys when he checks the time on his phone. As I add, “Have you?”.
Josh ignores my question and starts putting on his shoes.
“It's close to eight. We should get over before the police block up the roads in that area”.
“Sure thing”, I say, then check off my parking permit and leave it in my drawer until I return. Thus, I grab my sweatshirt, turn off the lights, and make sure to double-lock the dorm.
We walked out into the hall and I wondered if I should make anything on the stove since I haven’t used it when I moved in, and I highly doubt Josh knows how to cook.
By the time we made it to our truck, hesitantly glazing around the dark bounds of the light posts, surrounded by houses, and parks, we got in hearing the relief in our voices. He starts the truck and softly makes our way out of the dense parking lot towards the main street, seeing students walking back to their dorms as well. Some smiling, and some expressing no expression at all.
“Should we take a different path?”, he asks.
I look down the street and say softly, “If you want to”.
Josh looks at his watch. “Let's go right, I don’t feel comfortable going down that path where those boys were murdered”.
“Why not”, I ask.
Josh leans over to turn on the radio, but sums the volume to five, and says, “Sometimes it gives me the willies. But tonight is the only night, at least”.
While driving mid-way downtown, I get an odd thought and ask Josh, “Do you think they’re good people?”.
“Why do you say that?”, Josh asks.
I glance at a few other boys laughing on the sidewalk and see a baby boy being carried by their father in the corner of a store.
“I don’t know. Do you think evil will be gone one day? Like murdering someone will be a helpful thing rather than a deceiving one”, I say.
Josh takes a left turn and slows down to another stop light. “I don’t know. Maybe one day there will be peace. Maybe one day, we will all live good lives without evils coming in to hurt us”. Josh then pulls up to the house I'm going into. Seeing all kinds of boys and girls going in and out. Josh then says before I get out, “That's why we need more people like you. People who know the true enemy and not fantasy worlds like those other students”.
I giggle and hop out, and before I can even step on the porch, Josh says goodnight and leaves down the road. I march up to the front door, nodding my head to people walking out, and knock stubbornly on the door.
I enter the living room, everyone says good evening in their black bulletproof vests. “Hello, good evening”, I say.
I smile and feel the house fill with excitement, and in the first few minutes, I text Josh 'I'm safe, you have nothing to worry about’.
Josh then texts back saying, ‘I told you these guys are great. You're finally with your people.
By then, a man on the stairs raises a neo-nazi flag and we all gleefully cheer for his prideless, as the night then continues. I then put on my cap with my red symbol on top, and quickly say, “Good job, it's a good thing we got those boys. Soon we will have peace”, and the men cheer with their cups.
And before the clock strikes nine, I say in my head, over and over, ‘Peace’.
Then think, ‘Soon we’ll have peace’.
Smiling and giggling, I say again, ‘peace’. Then think, ‘Soon we’ll have peace and safety’. I raised my right hand, and when I felt everyone's pride, I was well pleased.

I wrote down on the psychiatrists form that I am trying to have a baby with my wife. When he prescribed lexapro I asked if it would affect fertility along with the other sexual side effects and he said it does not. I wrote in an email three days later that just not being able to climax was already making me concerned about having a baby and he suggested I reduce the dose. A week and a half later I decide to double check and I find out that ecitalopram does affect male sperm count and mobility. I love in a foreign country and I'm not interested in any legal action but I would like to know if anyone thinks I'm right to be as upset as I am.
The original problem was debilitating anxiety, and after two weeks of that getting worse as a side effect now I'm adding stress about my fertility and feel much worse than when I started the medicine. I use marijuana and that has started making things worse but I have terrible withdrawals so I feel stuck desiding which pain to go through. Telling my wife who's been hoping for a child for a year already that the medicine is more important. Or quitting either the lexapro or marijuana and not knowing which should go first. I expect withdrawals from lexapro as well even though I've only been on it a few weeks. Missing a dose last night brought on night sweats and trembling when I woke up in the middle of the night.
I'd really appreciate hearing any thoughts...