Based on what I have read, she certainly should have been charged under “Protection from Harassment Act 1997”. This is where the conversation should be, not whether Netflix is liable or whether or not she is innocent. Sorry, I did a cut and paste from the police.uk website, and it didn’t format well, but I shared it below. In a nutshell (no pun intended): Fixated, Obsessive, Unwanted, Repeated
What is stalking and harassment?
Stalking and harassment is when someone repeatedly behaves in a way that makes you feel scared, distressed or threatened.
There are different types of stalking and harassment and anyone can be a victim.
Stalking and harassment are offences under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.
Harassment
Someone you know could be harassing you, like a neighbour, or people from your local area or it could be a stranger.
Harassment may include:
bullying at school or in the workplace
cyber stalking (using the internet to harass someone)
antisocial behaviour
sending abusive text messages
sending unwanted gifts
unwanted phone calls, letters, emails or visits
It's harassment if the unwanted behaviour has happened more than once.
Sexual harassment
Sexual harassment is unlawful, as a form of discrimination, under the Equality Act 2010.
The Act says it’s sexual harassment if the unwanted behaviour:
violates your dignity
creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment (this includes the digital environment, online)
Some examples of sexual harassment would include:
sexual comments, jokes or gestures
staring or leering at your body
using names like ’slut’ or ‘whore’
unwanted sexual communications, like emails, texts, DMs
sharing sexual photos or videos
groping and touching
someone exposing themselves
pressuring you to do sexual things or offering you something in exchange for sex
Some of these are also forms of sexual or indecent assault.
If you’ve experienced any of these it’s not your fault and you don’t have to put up with it.
You can report it to us.
If you don’t feel ready to contact us, you can report anonymously to Crimestoppers.
Stalking
Stalking is like harassment, but it's more aggressive. The stalker will have an obsession with the person they're targeting.
Someone you know could be stalking you; an ex partner or a person you were friends with, or it might be a stranger. If it's someone you know, or knew, it doesn't mean that it's your fault; it's still stalking and it's an offence.
Stalking may include:
regularly following someone
repeatedly going uninvited to their home
checking someone’s internet use, email or other electronic communication
hanging around somewhere they know the person often visits
interfering with their property
watching or spying on someone
identity theft (signing-up to services, buying things in someone's name)
It's stalking if the unwanted behaviour has happened more than once.
The four warning signs of stalking
If the behaviour you're experiencing is:
Fixated Obsessive Unwanted Repeated
You can report the crime or you can contact the National Stalking Helpline for more advice.
Online stalking and harassment
Social networking sites, chat rooms, gaming sites and other forums are often used to stalk and harass someone, for example:
to get personal information
to communicate (calls, texts, emails, social media, creating fake accounts)
damaging the reputation
spamming and sending viruses
tricking other internet users into harassing or threatening
identity theft
threats to share private information, photographs, copies of messages

I can’t wait to leave, I haven’t even been there a month and i quite literally despise it. 12 an hour isn’t horrible but not great for this economy either but I knew what i was signing up for. And the first week i worked every day and I could have enough to pay rent (remember this for later in the rant)

1. The hiring process took forever, i was offered job on the spot, had a great interview and then it took them 4 weeks to get back to me????
2. They said on my first day they would train me in jewelry, fitting room & register. I stayed on the register the entire shift 7.5 hours, and two weeks later that’s all I know how to do still.
3. I had open availability at the time of interview, during the long 4 week hiring process my father had a lung transplant ( 🙌🏻) I had to take care of him, and asked for weekends off, they cut me down to TWO DAYS a week, because I “lied about my availability”.
4. These credit cards, in my area there are a lot of different cultures, and many different languages that I hear around the store ( most don’t speak english at all) but they still expect me to push a credit card and ask at least 3 times if they say no. How can you invite someone for a card if they don’t speak english? Then it seems my coworkers SCAM the people who don’t speak english because the customer doesn’t realize that they are applying for a credit card… Its sad honestly, and I hate to work for a company who preys on people like this.
5. My manager pulls me to the side everyday to tell me what I am doing wrong, “I’m not asking the right way”, example, when someone has a purchase for a small bag of gummy worms, why would they want to apply for a credit card. HECK they don’t even want a BAG!!!

I used to work at a craft store who was strict on cards as well, but we were REQUIRED to let them know they were applying for a credit card.
Overall I hate it and can’t wait to leave, I can’t pay any rent with two days a week and it’s sad and hurts but oh well. I’ll keep shopping at TJX but don’t work here. RUN

F20, 115 lbs, 5’4, history of anxiety, depression, and cyclothymia. Family history of hypothyroidism, depression, and paternal vascular dementia (my grandfather had it). Severe health anxiety that started about 10 months ago. I used to take anti depressants and mood stabilizers but haven’t been able to continue them in the last year or so due to my psychiatrist retiring.
I’ll try to keep this as short as possible, but I’ve done a ton of googling and research and keep coming up empty. I’m wondering if anyone has seen this “presentation” of symptoms before.
About ten-ish months ago I started having memory problems- I had word finding difficulties, severe headaches, and I lost things all the time. This was unlike me as my memory had always been sharp in highschool. I began to worry that I had a brain tumor, but I got a CT scan and the results were “unremarkable”. Since then I have had health anxiety relating to ALS (full body twitches, bad memory, etc) but that eventually went away after a few months. According to my boyfriend, my bad memory is episodic- it’ll be alright for a few weeks and then become bad again. With each episode, however, it seems to get worse.
I was ok-ish for a while but recently, my memory has been dreadful - I have short term memory issues. I can’t remember what happened a few seconds ago. I misplace and lose things frequently. I forget what tasks have to be done and often have to ask people to repeat themselves. I’ve started to lose the ability to do complex tasks.
-I struggle with hear, reading, and writing, specifically with words and complex sentences. I frequently mis-hear words or don’t really hear what people are saying to me at all. I see their mouth moving, I know they are saying something, it’s just not registering in my head. I usually have to ask them to repeat themselves. Today I thought people were saying completely different words than they actually were (car instead of club, etc). I struggle with writing. My hand writes things I didn’t ask it to, like today it wrote “where” instead of “like”. It adds strokes to letters that I write or completely misspells the word. I usually write something phonetically similar like write instead right or tight, or they instead of the, so on and so forth. I’ve forgot how to spell simple words I’ve been spelling for years.
-I’m seeing things, but not really seeing them, in a way. It’s like I see things half way. For example, at work, someone gave me their rewards card and I scanned it like it was an item. I was confused as to why the item wasn’t coming up and then realized it was a rewards card and not an item. It’s like my brain sees the barcode, but not the rest of the card and doesn’t recognize that it’s something separate that needs a separate procedure. Another example I could give is that I left a drawer partly open because that is what we do with till drawers once we take the money out for the night. But the drawer I left open wasn’t a till drawer, it was an actual drawer. It’s like my brain saw drawer and immediately thought to keep it open. Kind of like my short term memory isn’t working so my long term memory steps in. My eyes always feel glazed over, like I’m half way between seeing and my vision being hazy. Almost like I can see things clearly but my brain Is seeing them as fuzzy and not really recognizing what’s in front of me.
-it feels kinda like I’m in a dream. I have a hard time expressing myself, and I have word finding difficulties frequently. I often say things without thinking because I know I’m supposed to say something but my brain doesn’t recognize what yet. I’m confused often. It doesn’t feel like I’m fully “there”, like I’m on autopilot constantly and I don’t know how to shut it off. Even after 12 hours of sleep, I’m exhausted. I often can’t recognize how much time has passed.
I tried to find answers for these symptoms and the only answers I could find to memory and word problems was dementia or Primary progressive aphasia. I’m especially worried about the writing and spelling as these don’t seem to be a common symptoms of any mental health disorder. Any advice or even guesses would be truly appreciated.

I hope this letter finds you well. To begin, I was drawn to this topic through social media posts that shared dozens of records detailing the abuse and deaths of hundreds of children in these therapy programs. I have often wondered, how can these programs be allowed to cause this amount of trauma to teens and children? This inspired me to look deeper into the troubled teen industry and understand why paid “caregivers” have put so many in danger. If we want to protect the wellbeing of these teens, we must find a solution to regulating these industries. Without increased laws and regulations we continue to place America’s children into potential death traps. Now what is a wilderness therapy program? Wilderness therapy programs, on the surface, seem like a promising solution for troubled teens, offering a blend of nature immersion and psychiatric support. However, the roots of the troubled teen industry date back to the 1970s, with reports of abuse surfacing early on. Shockingly, despite decades of outcry and documentation of fatalities, political inertia persists, and federal oversight remains lacking. It is understandable that parents want their children to be happy, respectful, and well-mannered. However, in an attempt to do what is right for their struggling child, parents may turn to the troubled teen industry. Currently, according to the American Bar Association, there are thousands of teenagers in these programs within the U.S, programs that often induce trauma and abuse, even causing the deaths of their children. So, why do parents continue to put their children into these programs? Is the fear of losing the “perfect” family leading parents to enrolling their children into these troubled teens’ wilderness programs? So why do parents enroll their children in these awful facilities? Simple answer: manipulation. The troubled teen industry (TTI) often manipulates parents through a series of insidious tactics. For instance, leveraging fear by exaggerating the risks associated with a child's behavior and creating a sense of imminent danger. Isolation tactics further reinforce this urgency, convincing parents that the facility is their sole recourse. These industries hire workers framed as “education consultants” that utilize high-pressure sales strategies to exploit parental anxiety, and present their TTI program as the only viable option. In an article by USAtoday, reporters held interviews of parents and teens who experienced a TTI program at Evoke, a Utah facility. "I was just an anxious mom. I loved (Katelyn) to death," Tessie, Katelyn’s mom, says, "I was so desperate and desperately wanting to save my child from herself" (USAtoday). Programs offer promises of rapid transformation and they prey on parental desperation for quick, easy fixes. Emotional manipulation adds another layer, playing on a parents guilt and insecurity. By showcasing selective success stories and controlling information flow, they obscure potential risks and alternatives. Stigmatizing the child's behavior further pressures parents into compliance, painting their facility as the sole refuge from societal judgment. "’[Evoke] just made it seem like (she was) such a rotten kid and that she couldn't come home after the wilderness program,’ Tessie says, instead [Evoke suggested] Katelyn go to an aftercare program” (USAtoday). In this web of manipulation, parents often find themselves coerced into decisions they later regret, unaware of the nuanced realities obscured by these tactics. In an article from the “Cafemoms” blog titled My Daughter Was a Victim of the 'Troubled Teen' Industry & It Haunts Me to This Day, a mother recounts her perspective of the tactics used by Island View (IV) treatment center to send her sixteen year old daughter to their facilities. “We trusted the [education consultant] when he said IV was the best program in the country and the best fit for Colleen. What the [education consultant] didn’t tell us was that the reason so many IV grads did so well after graduation is because nearly all of them went straight from IV to another residential treatment”(Cafemoms). Despite this, there is still hope for change. Imprint News wrote an article that focused on recent protests and youth advocates who were pushing congress to introduce new laws. Specifically, they discussed the Stop Institutional Child Abuse Act. A main advocacy group aiming at these lawmakers is Breaking Code Silence, a group dedicated to advocating for young people who had experienced harm in a youth treatment center (Imprint News). Their main goal is to pass a Bill of Rights for all children in youth treatment centers (Imprint News). The article also mentions that Breaking Code Silence wants children to have guaranteed protection from physical restraint and monitored phone calls. They further require that children are provided with all the basic necessities (Imprint News). Paris Hilton, a well-known celebrity, discussed in a Washington post article when she was 16 years old when she was taken from her home by two men. This was a result of her parents signing her up for a teen wilderness program (Hilton). Hilton describes that she was beaten and malnourished throughout her time at a Utah Facility. In October 2021, she partnered with Breaking Code Silence and pushed for a reform that was signed into law last April (Hilton). In Utah, it is now mandatory for treatment centers to document any time that staff used physical restraint (Hilton). Immediately following they have to submit these reports to the Utah Office of Licensing (Hilton). It also prohibits programs from sedating residents or using mechanical restraints, such as handcuffs and chains (Hilton). Therefore, this proves that reforms can be implemented and that it is important to continue the fight for more. Without regulations these programs can run rampant and place hundreds of children in danger. Continuing to protest, collaborate with government officials, and raise awareness can, and will, eventually stop the persistence of these programs. Enforcing reports and proper care through the law is the only way to give teens struggling with mental illnesses in these programs a fighting chance to recover. On the other hand, supporters of the troubled teen industry have used studies and research to prove the effectiveness of these programs, one example being RedCliff Ascent. RedCliff Ascent is a wilderness therapy program that claims the effectiveness of wilderness therapy. In 2005, this company hired a researcher to study families and adolescents 2 years after the program. The results found that over 90% of adolescents found wilderness therapy as effective and 83% of adolescents were doing better. In another study by Dr. Steve Aldana, it was found that 91.4% of children experienced clinically significant improvement six months post program. The counter argument presented by RedCliff Ascent is not only biased as the research was initiated from a wilderness therapy company, but they do not provide a sample size. This is important because when making conclusive statements such as “Over 90% of adolescents contacted perceived wilderness therapy as effective” they could be talking about six out of seven children or two hundred out of two hundred twenty (RedCliff Ascent). Through further research, the same results can be presented without the use of wilderness therapy. An article by the American Psychology Association (APA) titled “Better options for troubled teens” presents a series of studies and programs that was created to help adolescents. These programs focus on community-based activities, activities to help connect teenagers with their parents, and activities that align with the teens interests. This includes computer labs, dance studios, and machine shops. These programs have found significant success in decreasing the amount of juvenile offenders from 50% to 4% in an area of Connecticut (APA). It did this by helping teens take accountability and understand their actions. It utilized role play, writing assignments, and guided discussions between the teens. Overall, the troubled teen industry has caused abuse, trauma, and death to many children across the United States. It is a trap for children and a trick for desperate parents. Through the personal stories from teens and parents, reports of mistreatment, and protests it can easily be seen the impact and the importance of preventing this industry from expanding, instead increasing regulations and transparency to protect America’s children. To keep these children safe it is imperative that everyone works together to enact legislation. Your support matters to keep America’s children protected.
Sincerely, A high school student trying to make positive change
Works Cited Brennan, Caleb, et al. “Youth Advocates Again Push Congress to Crack Down on ‘Troubled Teen’ Industry.” The Imprint, 19 Aug. 2022, Date Accessed Mar. 2 imprintnews.org/top-stories/youth-advocates-congress-troubled-teen-industry/67243.
DeAngelis, Tori. “Better Options for Troubled Teens.” https://www.apa.org, www.apa.org/monito2011/12/troubled-teens. Accessed Feb. 19
Hilton, Paris. “America’s ‘Troubled Teen Industry’ Needs Reform so Kids Can Avoid the Abuse I Endured.” Washington Post, 22 Oct. 2021, Date Accessed Feb. 5 www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/10/18/paris-hilton-child-care-facilities-a Buse-reform.
Krebs, Catherine E. Five Facts About the Troubled Teen Industry. 22 Oct. 2021 Date Accessed Apr. 23 www.americanbar.org/groups/litigation/resources/newsletters/childrens-rights/five-facts-about-troubled-teen-industry.
Moniuszko, Sara M. “Wilderness therapy was supposed to help these ‘troubled teens.’ It traumatized them instead.” UsaToday, 8 Dec. 2022, Date Accessed Apr. 15 www.usatoday.com/in-depth/life/health-wellness/2022/12/08/wilderness-therapy-troubled-teen-industry/9890694002.
Parenting, baby names, celebrities, and royal news CafeMom.com. 14 Oct. 2022, Date Accessed Apr. 19 https://cafemom.com/parenting/troubled-teen-industry-island-view
RedCliff Ascent. “Does Wilderness Therapy Work?” Wilderness Therapy for Teens Needing Mental Health Treatment RedCliff Ascent, 10 Jan. 2023, Date Acessed Feb. 21 www.redcliffascent.com/wilderness-therapy-program/does-wilderness-therapy-work

My college friend really needs help and has for about 10 years. Despite trying a lot of tactics to help her, she just isn’t interested in sobriety or therapy. The past few years she seems to be devolving into what I can only describe as alcoholic rambling, general madness, and randomly lashing out.
When she calls me, it typically goes something like this: she tells a story or talks at me, reminisces about the good old days, remembers something that upset her, yells at me, says she loves me, reminisces again, and then I try to exit.
I think it would help me to have a few terms to describe her behavior and maybe mine too… My husbands friend was a total jerk to me behind his back for years and no one believed me. Understanding what “gaslighting” is helped me frame that behavior and be able to talk about it!
So that’s why I’m posting and would so appreciate any comments.
—-—- here’s the long version:
My friend is a 37-year-old living in a rural area with her parents and grandmother with dementia since COVID. My friend is an alcoholic, workaholic, and has ADD. She also really smart, funny and social. Shes amazing at her job in sales/recruiting and really defines herself by it. Her parents are both alcoholics, kinda conspiracy theorists, and often mean to each other (yelling in the background, belittling, hiding things from eachother, etc). She feels obligated to help with her grandma and is kinda resigned to change nothing. Clearly the environment is bad and rubbing off on her.
For example, last week she called me frantic and crying because her dog killed a bird. She talked for about 30-45 minutes, jumping between the current bird and other bird stories, of which there are many. I barely uttered a mmhmm the whole time. Eventually, she asked what’s up with me. I mentioned that I’ve been depressed and struggling to find a job, which is putting stress on my marriage so overall I’m feeling really low. Since she’s in recruiting and knows my work history, I asked if she knew of any job openings. She then launched into a story about how competitive she is with her coworkers and how it’s all a game to get the biggest commissions on placements but those are for engineers. So I take that as a no and by the end of her monologue she was back on the topic of birds. I tried to exit the conversation, and she said to call her the next afternoon if I wanted to talk about job hunting and she may have ideas.
The next day, I called her, optimistic to see the side of her that shines and hoping for some jobs she can refer me to. Instead she pulled up my LinkedIn profile and started telling me what I should change. Which wasn’t want I wanted but sure if that’s her approach she’s the expert. Then she became critical, loudly laughing at my picture, saying my hair was covering part of my face and I looked like a villan, untrustworthy. She’d never hire me based on that photo. She was kinda manic laughing as I was kinda tearing up (I’m aging and avoid photos so I thought the one take by my hairdresser was a high quality headshot and my hair looked cute). Okay sure I’ll change it. The critique wore on roast style with the justification of this is just tough love, the way we talk to each other is unfiltered and she just always around guys.
She brought up networking and remembered introducing me to a coworker, Sally. I said I didn’t remember what ever happened with Sally because it was two years ago. To which she got very heated, accusing me of dropping the ball and never following up. She started screaming, how she put her neck out for me and I couldn’t be bothered. I tried to talk her down and eventually hung up. I later checked the old email thread and saw that I had followed up with Sally, but she was going on vacation, so it didn’t go anywhere. My friend kept calling and texting, so I eventually picked up. I told her I didn’t mess up, and I didn’t want to be spoken to like that. So she apologized for yelling. Then she went back to criticizing my LinkedIn, pointing out a spelling error and calling me stupid. I told her I wasn’t in a great place and that her feedback style was hurtful.
She then veered off into a story about how she loves me and has saved the letters I wrote her. I cut her off, saying that while I appreciate it, those notes aren’t relevant to this conversation and let’s focus on job talk. She got upset, saying I don’t value our friendship and was using her just for a job so fuck you blablabla…
After a few more hours of texts and calls, I let her know I’m going to prioritize my own feelings and block her number but I’ll check in with her in 3months. I’ve tried to support her but also keep my distance but I need to be firmer in enforcing that. I’d say forever but that feels like canceling her when I know she needs help. ——- Rewriting this, feels as long and draining as that conversation was so I’ll stop there.
All of this to say, what kind of pattern is that? Is it something she’s doing because her parents do it to her? Am I crazy to keep picking up her calls? I feel like if I had a name or terminology to unpack all these conversations it would be easier to process them.

Hi! I feel like a lot of the discourse about people not liking this season is in part due to people not really understanding what friends to lovers is, specifically the trope as it applies to Colin and Penelope, so I thought I might share my thoughts :)
Now I haven’t read the books - this is all based on what I gleaned from the show on multiple rewatches and as someone who has been the Penelope in a friendship for a longggg long time. Hopefully this makes sense.
Romance tropes can often boiled down to their immediate, basic truths. The popular enemies to lovers, for example: Enemy 1 + Enemy 2 + sexual tension = Lover 1 and Lover 2. Not to say enemies to lovers can’t be complex, but generally the starting point for enemies is an essential lack of trust between the parties and moments of connection (via fights) fueled by intense feelings of hatred/rage/whatever which can, in turn, translate to sexual tension. Due to the lack of trust, when they do get together it’s an explosion of that intense energy, highlighted even more-so by the knowledge that they don’t truly trust each other but they need each other which makes the heart race all the more and the passion all that more explosive.
Let’s look at Kate and Anthony as this trope. When they meet there is an immediate spark, fueled by a race in which they’re in competition. Once she hears him at the ball she decides she will do everything in her power to stop him from marrying her sister, and since he is determined to marry Edwina every interaction they have from that point on, until they have their happily ever after in the last episode, can be considered a fight. Moments like the bane of my existence and you vex me are such high intensity because it’s two people fueled by anger and sexual/romantic tension. They need each other like air but will do everything to fight it because of the anger, making the onscreen affections super intense for the viewer (especially as viewers who have just been introduced to Kate and are getting to know her through the lens of Anthony).
Now friends to lovers is, if I may say, quite a bit more complicated. A basic boiled down is Friend 1 + Friend 2 + romance/sexual tension = Lovers. But all friendships are different - if you’re new friends your pipeline to lovers is likely entirely different than old friends to lovers. If one party is in love with the other that changes the dynamic entirely; are they long distance or close? Were they childhood friends? Are they both likeable and popular or is one more nerdy and quiet or both? Do they know each other’s families? Are they best friends or just friends? All of these and more create new dynamics and emotions that can lead to love in different ways. My point is that friends to lovers is not as easy to pin down as something like enemies to lovers. So that’s why a couple like Polin may seem like they don’t have as much chemistry on screen - because their intensity shines in a different way than what we’re used to in Bridgerton.
Going into season three we know that Penelope has been in love with Colin for a long time, but during that time the two also formed a close friendship. When Colin proposed to Marina, yes Penelope whistledowned about the pregnancy to stop him from marrying her for love reasons, but also because he is her friend and she didn’t want to see him trapped in a loveless marriage. We also know that when Colin traveled between seasons one and two Penelope most often responded to his letters. Even during a scene in season two Pen specifically asks to hear more about his travels, even though everyone else in Colin’s life had asked him to stop talking about it. Pen’s crush and friendship don’t cancel each other out, they exist side by side as two parts of Penelope that often overlap but are most importantly separate entities. And she knows that.
Colin does not. In season three when Colin is talking about when they first met, Penelope looks away with anxiety when Colin suggests he knows why Penelope was so forward in making fun of him for falling off his horse and starting their friendship. She knows it’s because she had a crush on him. He states that it was because they were kids. This means it’s canon that Penelope had a crush on him since the moment they met. As a result, Colin has never experienced a friendship with Pen that doesn’t also have an underlying crush. He doesn’t know that Pen doesn’t respond to everyone’s letters all the time, or hangs onto their every word, or goes out of her way to talk to them. How Pen acts around him is how he assumes she acts around everyone - that’s why he doesn’t pick up on her crush.
It’s also why, I argue, he doesn’t realize that he loves her until the kiss in season three. He truly and genuinely takes her affections, her friendship, for granted because he doesn’t understand that someone so loyal and loving like that is rare. He doesn’t appear to have much else in the way of friends; outside of his family we don’t really see him interact with other men, and in season three the “friends” he does spend time with make comments to suggest they only started hanging out with him after his personality change to be more like his brothers - a rake who doesn’t care much for real affections. It’s why he said he would never court Penelope Featherington, or why he said “You are Pen, you do not count” when asked why he was still talking to her if he swore off women. He was super young when his dad died, so the only male role models he has for what love means are Anthony and Benedict. So, as he understands it, a man courting a woman is about sleeping around until the man finds a suitable match that pleases the family regardless of the man’s happiness. Even though he saw that Anthony fell in love by the time Colin said he would never court Pen, he didn’t see Anthony’s journey to understanding that love is not something to run from but something to cherish like we, the viewers, did. Anthony’s arc was just background noise for Colin, so it wasn’t like that would change his outlook on what Anthony’s actions in season one and beginning of season two loudly called out: choosing love over meaningless sex is idiotic and weak. It is explained in a letter that the reason Colin decided to try being like his brothers is BECAUSE Penelope stopped responding to him during his travels between seasons two and three. He decided to start guarding his heart, throwing on the rakish armor we see him dawn in the first half of season three, because he didn’t have that relationship that made him feel stable and loved anymore.
This is why Colin is genuinely distressed when Penelope walks away from him at the garden party in the first episode of season three, and why he went after her to explain that he missed her. He loves his relationship with her, not understanding that what he feels is actually love for her because he has never been aware that true love feels the way it does when he is with Pen. He sees Penelope as his best friendship, rather than the love of his life, because he literally can’t see it any other way based on how everything in his life played out to that point.
———
Okay this is way longer than I intended this to be already, but to finally make it to my main point! The Friends to Lovers trope as it plays out in Season Three Part One: Polin Do Be Polining.
What does all this mean for how Polin’s intensity shines as a couple? Due to the way their friendship has played out things like Colin taking Pen to the dance floor (not small social feat btw) in season one when Cressida bullies her, seeking each other out at social events, Pen asking about his travels - all of these are part of their relationship! It’s all part of the slow burn; it’s just less slap-you-in-the-face noticeable, to a viewer of a show about specified romance, as Kate and Anthony and even Simon and Daphne because acting like friends is an implicit part of Polin’s love story. Because they are best friends as well as eventually lovers!!
This is in full display in Season three, though put more on blast since it’s their season to get together. Colin saying he’ll teach Penelope how to get a husband isn’t a pity thing, it’s a real moment of genuine care that Colin is extending towards her.
—— “Pen wants to get a husband to be happy? Great! I’ll help to make her happy because her happiness means everything to me. Because I am her friend. Duh :)” - top ten photos taken ten seconds before disaster. ——
And it works! They start spending all this time together, and Pen has always looked gorgeous but is finally wearing clothes that she feels gorgeous in and you can see it in the way she acts, and suddenly Colin’s heart starts doing all these weird jumps around her like when she’s in the drawing room and when she wraps his hand because he has always loved her, so he doesn’t understand what these feelings that are coming up during these scenes are because they are not new feelings, just more intense ones of what he believes is pure friendship.
Penelope, on the other hand, has had her brain decide to give up on Colin Bridgerton (even though her heart hasn’t). As someone who’s been there, being in unrequited love with your friend is brutal but you can never really let go. No matter how many people they date, or the hours you spend together talking about their new crush, or the life moments share together where they do everything but love you there is always that small spark of hope in your chest that you can’t let go of lest they ever possibly realize they love you back. That chance is too precious to give up - that’s why Penelope can’t give Debling a real answer when he asks her if she would like to be with Colin in episode four. Logically she knows she should give it up but her heart just can’t. She is a hopeless romantic and her life has been spinning around Colin Bridgerton since she was 16 like the earth around the Sun. There is no other way to live, for her, if she isn’t in love with Colin. And that’s what breaks her heart the most.
It’s also why, I believe, she asks him to kiss her in that garden. She had just written about herself in Whistledown that she did the upmost embarrassing act of taking Colin’s assistance on the marriage market, and her mother dressed her down about being a spinster for the rest of her life. All of Pen’s plans, of marrying and getting out, are utterly gone for her in that moment when she goes out to the garden. She doesn’t have her prospects. She doesn’t have Eloise. She doesn’t have safety in her own home. The only thing she has left is Colin. That’s why she asks him to kiss her, because he might grant her this one kindness of making her feel alive for just this one moment before the rest of her life ends. That moment is the culmination of all of her feelings up to that point in the show. She’s given up on Colin - she wouldn’t have asked him to kiss her had she any hope left. This was her last ditch attempt to just be a girl and be kissed regardless of what he actually meant to her. It wasn’t out of desperation, it was staring down the barrel of the gun with societies’s finger on the trigger.
When she asks him Colin is taken aback. Not because he doesn’t want to kiss her but because he has never considered it before. Kissing was reserved for women you are looking to sleep with at a bar, for prostitutes in alleyways, not for his caring Pen. I’ve seen some upset over not including more of Colin’s writing in the show, as he becomes quite the writer in the books apparently, and the writing we do see is just about sex but given the way they paced the show they provided the most important piece of context for Colin’s understanding of intimacy in the writing they did use. He wonders how one can feel, despite sleeping with every kind of woman across Europe, such intimacy in physical closeness and yet such distance emotionally. It’s some level of satisfying for him to sleep around, but it doesn’t fulfill him in the way it seemed to fulfill his brothers. He cannot equate the idea of kissing to Penelope because he feels such emotional closeness to her. But when she brings it up, suddenly everything clicks into place for him. All the emotions he feels towards her, what he thought was just friendship, is so much more. Yes she is his friend, but by god he wants to kiss his friend; not out of the need to search for something but of the overwhelming feeling of going home.
Their kiss is sweet, and soft. Unlike Daphne and Anthony’s first kisses with their respective partners it isn’t this immense clashing of bodies and teeth. It’s two friends who love each other finally meeting each other as sparks fly.
———
Colin is left speechless, and confused. The kiss was amazing to him because he finally unlocked that part of him that made him realize he was in love with Penelope. The kiss was amazing to Penelope because she has been in love with him for so long, but it was also tinged with her own doubts and feelings of hopelessness. That’s why she runs away, and thanks him, because this was her last stand and he was just her friend helping her out as she believes.
But as always, a night of sleep helps clarify things. The next time Pen goes into society she is awkward but still well intentioned about getting a husband because that kiss was a long day’s worth of self pity followed by, in her terms, a moment of weakness. But it clarified things for her too. Now she can’t die without ever having been kissed, so that ultimatum she set up in her own mind was gone and everything seems much more manageable from that point on. Colin, as we know, is a wreck who is absolutely bamboozled at these feelings and we love to watch him flounder!!!
———
Now the tables have been turned. To those of who are think Penelope should have chosen Debling, this part is for you. This is when Debling really starts to court Penelope as she goes after him. She literally fights Cressida for him, because he seems like the most amenable husband for her to be able to continue Whistledown and be provided security. She isn’t looking for love in Debling because she already has love in Colin (love she believes will always remain unrequited, but that kiss can be a memory she cherishes for the rest of her life and that be that); she basically did what Anthony did at the beginning of season two. Find a suitable match that makes the most sense for her and leave searching for a love match out of it. She likes Debling, for sure, and he’s a rly nice guy!! He cares about her in a way that a suitor might, and I’m certain had they gotten married he wouldn’t have been mean to her or anything. But she would’ve been lonely. As remembered she is a romantic, someone who craves the love she reads about in her romance books. She’s spent most of her conscious life in love - marrying Debling would stop that in its tracks. In his own words, Debling tells Pen that he could try to maybe love her but that it was far too unlikely to find any room in his heart her for over his passions (aroace Debling stand rise). He specifically mentions that he is choosing her to marry because she has her own passions, separate from his, that can keep her company while he is gone both physically and emotionally from her. She doesn’t realize this until it’s too late, when her focus on the chase is over, and Debling asks her mother for her hand. It’s only then that she thinks that maybe she could hold out for love, and that power is strong enough to make her actively not want to ensure her security through Debling.
Love is treacherous, and yet we yearn for it like a sailor who cannot help but smile at the beauty of the raging sea at it comes crashing down upon him. Penelope would rather a thousand lifetimes of the chance to be in love with Colin over one lifetime married to Debling in safety.
That is why Debling breaks it off with her. Because she loves Colin, Debling knows she would choose Colin over him, and he sees Colin’s interest in her even if she does not. Like girl…. Colin literally found out she was going to get engaged, ran to the ball, interrupted the dance wherein Debling was going to ask Pen to marry him, ran after her carriage just to know if she was engaged because he couldn’t fathom letting her get away in a loveless marriage, and when finding out she was not engaged telling her he loved her even if she did not love him back because he simply had to express to her how much he loved her as he owed her that as his friend. Colin got in his knees in that carriage because he was genuinely splaying out his heart to her for her to dissect as she chose. He put himself at her mercy because that is where he believes his place to be - hers.
———
The carriage scene is, of course, the moment of highest intensity from the viewer standpoint of what we think love should appear to be. Other scenes could be Colin’s dream, and the moment in the sweets tent, etc. But those moments aren’t all of Polin’s love story. They may be the most visceral to witness, but they are just as important as the two of them laughing together in the corner of a ballroom. Their romantic trope is defined as Friends to Lovers, but that isn’t quite right - they are both. There is no big “or” between the two. Colin and Penelope are friends and lovers, and all of it is a beauty to witness.
Okay that’s it! If you’ve made it this far thanks for sticking around to hear my obsessive little thoughts. I wish you a very happy Bridgerton rewatch :)

The ask questions and answer questions learning method has four types: General Question Learning Method (GQLM), Partial Question Learning Method (PQLM), Reading Question Learning Method (RQLM), and Characteristic Question Learning Method (CQLM): https://www.reddit.com/usetevvyline/comments/1cprjw7/the_ask_questions_and_answer_questions_learning/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
[Rules for combining types]

1. The square brackets [ ] show the order for combining. For example, you first combine the types inside the smallest square bracket and then you start using the types outside of that bracket to change certain attributes of the types in the smallest square bracket. (Rule 12).
2. The letter A (affector) is used for types that affect E or M types.Types in a double type combination can not be both affectors.
3. The letter E (effector) is used for types that get affected by affector types. Types in a double type combination can be both Effectors. Being an effector type bring out the type's natural rules such as choose a number or choose wh- questions in double type combinations, but does not combine them. Two E types can be unusable if there is no A type next to them. Additionally, if every type in a combination is an E type, it can be a switch combination. Switch combinations represent what standard form combinations or type combinations you can switch while learning.
4. When a type can be both an A and E type, the letter M (mixed) is used. M types can not affect A types, but they can affect E types and M types.
5. When starting the combination process, you go from left to right. If an A type has an E type next to it, you will combine them both. If an A type has an A type next to it, that A type will "hop" over its A type neighbour and keep hopping over other A types until it finds an E or M type to combine with.
6. The phrase (number) part time is used to indicate the target of a type (what type they want to combine with). The number starts at 0 in the position of the closest E or M type to the right of the type affected by part time, and it increases by 1 every time you reach another type to the right of it. You need to increase the value of the number to the number of the part time.
7. Full time is used to indicate that a type's targets are every E or M type to its right.
8. The symbol / is used to indicate "floors of combinations". When the / symbol is used, some types are sorted into (type)/ and /(type). There are two floors and it is behind the / and after the /. This symbol is used to lower the space required for combining. If a type doesn't have a / symbol and it has neighbor types with the / symbol, it affects them both if they can be targeted.
9. The multiplication sign × indicates an added rule and the addition sign + and the subtraction sign − indicates adding or subtracting types.
10. In very specific cases of combinations, there can be an object (OB) that you can either add or subtract to one or more types. A and M types can not affect objects.
11. Letters are used to simplify the combination process. The letters A for affector, E for effector, M for mixed, and OB for object are added before type letters. Part time and full time are added before the letters A, E, M, and OB and are separated by a space. For example 2PT AG1. [Type letters] GQLM 1 = G1 GQLM 2 = G2 Systemic PQLM = SP Wh- question PQLM = WP (Number) part time = (number) PT Full time = FT
12. The types outside of the smallest square bracket [ ] can affect attributes in different ways of the combined types in the smallest square bracket. They sometimes do not act the same like the types in the smallest square bracket.

• GQLM 1 = make something be asked all the time or remove something. Ex. [1PT AWP × AG1 [MSP × MWP × EG1]] = one or more wh- questions chosen by Wh- question PQLM can have their systemic number removed, making them asked all the time. The AG1 is targeting MSP and this means AG1 removes the systemic number for one or more wh- questions.
• GQLM 2 = change a specific attribute of a type. Ex. [1PT AWP × AG2 [MSP × MWP × EG1]] = one or more wh- questions chosen by Wh- question PQLM can have their systemic number increased or decreased. The AG2 is targeting MSP and this means AG2 increases or decreases the systemic number for one or more wh- questions.
• Wh- question PQLM = choose one or more. Examples [1PT AWP × AG1 [MSP × MWP × EG1]] and [1PT AWP × AG2 [MSP × MWP × EG1]] have both an outside Wh- question PQLM. The 3PT AWP type is targeting the MWP type and this means "choose one or more wh- questions".
• Systemic PQLM = choose a number for the second result of something. First result and second results: systemic number: first result is not asking one question with the value of the systemic number decreasing by 1 and second result is asking one question when the value decreases to 0. -- ask limit: first result is asking one question with the value of the ask limit increasing by 1 and the second result is not asking one question with the value of the ask limit decreasing by 1. Ex. [ASP x [MSP x EG1]] (systemic number for all types of questions) = means that all types of questions get a systemic number and once the systemic number reaches 0, you ask a certain number of questions chosen by the number of the ASP.
• RQLM 1 = reverse something Ex. [AR1 x 1PT MSP [MG1 x ESP]] (ask limit for all types of questions) = means that the MSP first choses how much the ask limit value of all questions decreases when not answering a question (asking a question can increase the ask limit value by 1 and not answering a question can decrease the ask limit value by 3). The "second result" turns into a "first result" target for the MSP when the AR1 affects it. This means that you can choose how much the ask limit value of all questions types increases when asking a question. If you want to affect both the first result and the second result, you can make the combination [AR1 x 1PT MSP x 1PT ASP [MG1 x ESP]].
• Repeating RQLM = change one of a type's characteristic when the characteristic is used one time. Ex. [1PT RQ [MSP x EG1]] (systemic number for all types of questions) = means that the RQ choses the starting value of the systemic number every time the systemic number reaches 0. For example, the starting value of a systemic number could be 4 and after it reaches 0, it could be 2. 13.. When combining, you need to find the highest number of possible combinations. For example, [ASP x AWP x EG1] = a systemic number is given to all types of questions + all the wh- questions chosen are asked all the time.

[Standard form combinations] -- [AG1 × EG2] = GQLM 1 -- [AG2 × EG1] = GQLM 2 -- [ASP × EG1] = Systemic PQLM -- [AWP × EG1] = Wh- question PQLM -- [AR1 × EG1] = RQLM 1 -- [ARR × EG1] = Repeating RQLM -- [C1 x EG1] = CQLM 1 -- [TC x EG1] = Time CQGLM -- [AMC × EG1] = Mental image CQLM [Standard form switch combinations] --[[AG1 × EG2] + [AG2 × EG1]] = GQLM 1 and GQLM 2 can be switched. -- [[ASP × EG1] + [AWP × EG1]] = Systemic PQLM and Wh- question PQLM can be switched. -- [[AG1 × EG2] + [ASP × EG1]] = GQLM 1 and Systemic PQLM can be switched. and so on... Standard form combinations are not counted as double type combinations.
Definitions:

1. When a systemic number is shared between multiple types of questions, it means that the systemic number decreases by 1 every time you let any of those types of questions go unanswered. When a systemic number is non shared between multiple types of questions, it means that each type of question has its own systemic number that decreases by 1 individually for that type of question when you let that type of question go unanswered.
2. When an ask limit is shared between multiple types of questions, it means that the value of all those types of questions increases by 1 every time you ask any of those types of questions and decreases by 1 every time you let any of those types of questions go unanswered. When an ask limit is non shared between multiple types of questions, it means that each type of question has its own ask limit that the value of each type of question increases and decreases individually when it is asked or left unanswered.

Some of these double type combinations are unusable and may be useful in triple type combinations, quadruple type combinations, and so on. The main reasons these double type combinations can not be used are:

1. No GQLM 1 or GQLM 2 type in the combination. GQLM 1 is like a "field" for questions. GQLM 1 is commonly modified to make combinations. GQLM 2 can also be modified, but it makes everything become optional. GQLM 2 is used more often to change attributes of types.
2. One or both of the types have no functions in the combination.

Symbol meanings: [1] all the wh- questions chosen by Wh- question PQLM [2] given a non shared systemic number [3] given a non shared ask limit [4] choose a number [5] choose one or more wh- questions [6] ask questions for every type of information you encounter [7] given a shared ask limit [8] given a shared systemic number [9] all types of questions [1/] mental image questions [1Y] one or more wh- questions can have their ask limit (GQLM 1) removed or one or more wh- questions can have their ask limit (GQLM 2) increased or decreased. [1X] one or more wh- questions can have their systemic number (GQLM 1) removed or one or more wh- questions can have their systemic number (GQLM 2) increased or decreased. [Qu] = questions [Z] asked all the time [F] given a feel like effect (GQLM 2). [R] given a repeating effect (repeating RQLM). [TR] = repeating effect [M] given a mental image effect (mental image CQLM). [A] given a no answer effect (RQLM 1). [O] only [IN] given to
[Non useable double inner type combinations] (No GQLM 1) -- [ASP × EWP] = [12] -- [AWP × ESP] = [13] -- [ESP × EWP] = [4] + [5] [Non useable double outer type combinations] (One or both of the types are useless) -- [ESP × EG1 or EG2] = [4] + [6] or [6F] -- [EWP × EG1 or EG2] = [5] + [6] or [6F] (No GQLM 1) -- [ARR × EMC] = [9RM] -- [EMC × ERR] = + [9RM] -- [ARR × EWP] or [AWP x ERR] = [1R] -- [ARR × ESP] = [TR7] -- [ASP × ERR] = [TR8] -- [AMC × ESP] = [97M] -- [ASP × EMC] = [98M] -- [AWP × ERR] or [ARR × EWP] = [1R] -- [AWP × EMR] = [1M] or [AMC × EWP] = [1M] -- [AMC × ERR] = [9RM] [Useable double inner type combinations] -- [AG1 × EG2] = [6] Standard form combination GQLM 1 -- [AG2 × EG1] = [6F] Standard form combination GQLM 2 -- [ARR × ER1] or [ER1 x ERR] = [9A] + [9R] -- [AR1 × ERR] = [9AR] [Useable double outer type combinations] -- [AG1 × ESP] = [97] -- [ASP × EG1] = [98] Standard form combination of Systemic PQLM. -- [AWP × EG1] = [1O6] Standard form combination Wh- question PQLM. -- [AWP × EG2] or [AG2 x EWP] = [1F] -- [AG2 × ESP] = [92/8F] -- [AMC × ER1] = [9AM] -- [EMC × ER1] = [9AM] -- [AR1 × EG1] = [6A] Standard form combination of RQLM 1. -- [AR1 × EG2] or [AG2 x ER1] = [9FA] -- [AR1 × EWP] or [AWP x ER1] = [1A] -- [AR1 × ESP] = [9A7] -- [ASP × ER1] = [9A8] -- [ARR × EG1] = [9R] Standard form combination of repeating RQLM. -- [ARR × EG2] or [AG2 × ERR] = [9FR] -- [AMC × EG1] = [9M] Standard form combination of Mental image CQLM. -- [AMC × EG2] or [AG2 × EMR] = [9MF] -- [AG2 × EWP] = [1F] -- [ASP × EG2] = [98F] -- [AR1 × EMC] = [9AM]
[Unknown effect or impossible combinations] -- [AG1 × EWP] = ?
Symbol meanings (simplified): [13] all the wh- question chosen are given a non shared ask limit. [17] all the wh- questions chosen are given a shared ask limit. [1Y] one or more wh- questions can have their ask limit (AG1) removed, making those wh- questions asked all the time/one or more wh- questions can have their ask limit (AG2) increased or decreased, making some wh- questions have different ask limits. [12] all the wh- question chosen are given a non shared systemic number. [18] all the wh- question chosen are given a shared systemic number. [1X] one or more wh- questions can have their systemic number (AG1) removed, making them asked all the time/one or more wh- questions can have their systemic number (AG2) increased or decreased, making some wh- questions have different systemic numbers. [98] a shared systemic number is given to all types of questions. [97] a shared ask limit is given to all types of questions. [1Z] all the wh- question's chosen are asked all the time.
[Triple inner type combinations] Currently not enough types. [Triple outer type combination] -- [ASP × MWP × EG1] = [12] -- [ASP × MWP × EWP] = [18] -- [ASP × AWP × EG1] = [98] + [1Z] -- [FT ASP × MWP × EG1] = [12] + [98] -- [AG1 × MSP × EWP] = [17] -- [AWP × MSP × EG1] = [13] [Quadruple inner type combinations] Currently not enough types. [Quadruple outer type combinations] -- [2PT MSP × MWP × MSP x EG1]] = [13] + [98] -- [1PT ASP × AG1 × MSP × EWP] = [17] + [12] [(5) Quintuple outer type combination] -- [AG1 × ESP × ASP × MWP × EWP] = [18] + [97] -- [ASP × EG1 × ASP × MWP × EWP] = [18] + [98] -- [AG1 × ESP × AG1 × MSP × EWP] = [17] + [97] -- [ASP × EG1 × AG1 × MSP × EWP] = [17] + [98] -- [ASP/AG1 × MWP/MSP × EWP] = [17] + [18] -- [1PT AWP × AG1 or AG2 × [AG1 × MSP × EWP] = [17] + [1Y] -- [AWP × 1PT AG1 or AG2 × [MWP × MSP × EG1]] = [13] + [1Y] -- [1PT AWP × AG1 or AG2 × [MSP × MWP × EG1]] = [12] + [1X] -- [ASP × 2PT MWP × AWP × MSP × EG1] = [13] + [12] -- [AG1 × ESP × ASP × MWP × EG1] = [12] + [97] -- [1PT AWP × AG1 or AG2 × [FT MSP × MWP × EG1]] = [12] + [1X] + [98] [(6) Sextuple outer type combinations] -- [ASP/AWP × MWP/MSP × EWP/EG1] = [13] + [18] -- [1 PT AWP × AG1 or AG2 × [1PT ASP × AG1 × MSP × EWP] = [17] + [1Y] + [12] -- [AWP × 1PT AG1 or AG2 × [1PT AG1 × MWP × MSP × EG1]] = [13] + [97] -- [1PT AWP × 2PT AG1 or AG2 × [2PT MSP × MWP × MSP × EG1]] = [13] + [1Y] + [98] -- [AWP × 1PT AG1 or AG2 × [1PT AG1 + MWP × MSP × EG1]] = [13] + [1Y] + [12] [(7) Septuple outer type combination] -- [/1 PT AWP × /AG1 or AG2 × [ASP/AG1 × MWP/MSP × EWP]] = [17] + [1Y] + [18] -- [1PT AWP × 2PT AG1 or AG2 × [2PT AG1 × 2PT MSP × MWP × MSP × EG1]] = [13] + [98] + [97] -- [1PT AWP × 2PT AG1 or AG2 × [ASP × 1PT MWP × AWP × MSP × EG1] = [13] + [12] + [1X] -- [3PT AWP × AG1 or AG2/2PT AG1 OR AG2 × [1PT MSP × AG1 × MSP × EWP]] = [17] + [1Y] + [12] + [1X] [(8) Octuple outer type combination] -- [1PT AWP × 2PT AG1 or AG2 × [3PT ASP/ASP × EWP × AWP × MSP × EG1] = [13] + [12] + [1X] + [98] -- [1 PT AWP × AG1 or AG2/AG1 or AG2 × [MSP/AG1 × MWP/MSP × EWP] = [17] + [1Y] + [18] + [1X] (9) Nonuple outer type combination] -- [2PT AWP/1PT AWP × 3PT AG1 or AG2/AG1 or AG2 [MSP × 2PT MWP × MWP × MSP × EG1]] = [13] + [1Y] + [12] + [1X] -- [1PT AWP/2PT AWP × AG1 or AG2/3PT AG1 or AG2 × [MSP × 1PT MWP × MWP × MSP × EG1] = [13] + [12] + [1X] + [98] + [97] [(10) Decuple outer type combination] Currently none. [(11) Undecuple outer type combination] -- [4PT AWP/3PT AWP × 5PT AG1 or AG2 [AG1 × MSP × 4PT MSP × 3PT MSP × MWP × AWP × MSP × EG1]] = [13] + [1Y] + [12] + [1X] + [98] + [97] -- [2PT AWP/3PT AWP × AG1 or AG2/2PT AG1 or AG2 × [ASP × EG1 × MSP/AG1 × MWP/MSP × EWP]] = [17] + [1Y] + [18] + [1X] + [98] -- [2PT AWP/3PT AWP × AG1 or AG2/2PT AG1 or AG2 × [AG1 × ESP × MSP/AG1 × MWP/MSP × EWP]] = [17] + [1Y] + [18] + [1X] + [97]

Somebody requested that I write down some resources for Dzogchen in the sidebar, so I thought I would do a post as well to give a sort of background and offer anyone else the chance to get in on the conversation or building of resources too...
But first,

A Word on Secrecy, Safety Maturity, and Cults

I'm writing this post out by request of someone who messaged me, with the intention of reaching a wider audience, or all beings, who could benefit from learning about these teachings. I have to caution, though, that they may not be for everybody, and in that regard, I would advise gentleness, with yourself and others, with regards to this path. Please take care of yourself, and keep a measure of your own mind with regard to your mental health and these practices. I wish that those who read this post are only those who it may help, and I apologize preemptively to all those it may hurt, or if I've made any mistakes in my writing.
With that in mind, I can maybe share a little bit about the secrecy aspect of what is called Vajrayana. Someone who learns about these practices but does not genuinely practice them can generate obstacles to their own awakening; specifically with Dzogchen, there is a real danger of intellectualizing the practice such that one covers over their own mind with a sheen of thoughts and fabrication, blocking one from advancing towards awakening. In that regard, this particular practice is called self secret. From what I know, many Lamas won't introduce one to the practice if they aren't sure the student has the capability to grasp it, and also - the student won't be able to practice it or understand it if they're not able to. But, to give some background, from what I understand the strongest indicator of capability to practice Dzogchen, is an interest in doing so.
On the subject of cults - I have to note that Dzogchen practice can be very personal, but that is not a license for any teacher to abuse you, in any form, ever. Things that happened in the past - students getting slapped, hit with shoes, etc. - happened in the past - but that doesn't make them appropriate teachings devices today. A genuinely compassionate teacher won't take advantage of your practice to abuse you, steal your money, degrade you, control you, or anything like that. If they try to - it is more likely that you've stumbled on a cult, and should get away as fast as you can.
As for what makes a good teacher - others have asked this question before, and u/krodha in particular has written out a good description many times, although I can't find the quote he usually uses unfortunately.
As far as general safety in the practice goes, Lama Lena has written this (and I'm shamelessly stealing it from her website):
"The responsibility to take care of your own mind rests with you; not the lama, not your mom, not your cat. So, take it upon yourself to be safe and use common sense."
Please, read that whole page and heed the warnings.

My Practice

I've been working with Dzogchen for about 3.5 years now, since approximately the end of 2020. I'd been interested in Mahayana practices for the better part of a decade before that, but mostly just practicing Samatha by the way of Anapanasati and Metta, and also through the framework provided by *The Mind Illuminated*. I had been curious about Dzogchen for a bit, mostly from reading about it on Wikipedia and just, in general, being interested in seeing what the fuss is surrounding vajrayana, tantra, and the "highest system" called Atiyoga.
By chance, I happened to see a comment on Dzogchen from someone who basically said "If anyone is looking for pointing out, feel free to message me." So I sent them a message giving my general background and motivation for the practice, and they invited me to join them on meditationonline.org - which had been a place they'd been doing meditation for a few years (and still do, I suppose I'd consider myself part of that sangha). I happened to meet the individual who I'd been messaging, a Nyingma lama called Dawai Gocha, and received pointing out, along with teachings for the next few years... up until the present day.
My main practice now is Dzogchen - I gradually transitioned into this from Anapanasati over the course of about six months - and most of my sessions are now just me resting in awareness - Rigpa. I generally do augment this however with other practices, like Satipatthana, mantra recitation, and other practices from the three main vehicles, simply because I like to do them and find them helpful on the path.

What is Dzogchen?

I can't say anything that has not already been said by others, in particular, meditation masters with vastly more experience than I have - but to put it simply, Dzogchen practice can encompass a large number of different types of ancillary practices, and one central practice, which the ancillaries are meant to accomplish. The main practice is resting in the Rigpa.

How to Learn

"Get pointing out instructions from a qualified teacher before embarking on Dzogchen and Mahamudra. A teacher can address pressing questions as they arise and give you a map and tools for the journey. As practitioners, we can rely on those who have hiked the trail before us." - Lama Lena
Since the awareness nature is always present in every being, it is both simple to learn and simple to maintain the practice - being that one just simply is introduced to the awareness nature, and then abides in it at all times.
As far as being introduced to that awareness, in my experience there are many avenues, such as getting pointed out in person( verbally or non verbally), in visions, through texts, in dreams, etc. In one of her videos, Lama Lena goes through, I think, five different days that transmission/pointing out can happen.
But in my experience, getting pointing out, repeatedly and periodically, from a teacher is the most effective (and probably the most important) way to learn, like having someone coach you through riding a bicycle, until you finally internalize the fundamentals and are able ride on your own. Even someone that can check your progress, humble you, and keep you from common pitfalls, can be extremely helpful. Dzogchen, to me and from what I have read from e.g. Tulku Urgyen, is very simple, so simple that many people are able to miss it extremely easily. Whether we miss it because we're so worked up, or because we are subtly fabricating something and fixating on the fabrication - there is a miss, and from what I know, it's better to realize that than carry on doing whatever else. The harsh reality of Dzogchen practice is that fixation, because we're so habituated to it as human beings, is extremely easy, and being led astray by fixation means your meditation becomes a conditioned Samatha practice. On a lighter note though - from my perspective, one we learn to continually distinguish between Consciousness from Wisdom, we are on very solid ground, and it becomes easier and easier to recognize when we've become fixated.
On the subject of teachers - I would consider myself to have had many teachers. My main teacher, I mentioned before, is a lama I talk to live over the internet, but I would also say I've received teachings from recordings, from books, and in dreams. For clarity, I will state again: having a teacher that you can use to verify your practice is very important so as not to fall into common pitfalls. Whether you are confirming your experience through texts, reasoning, pointing out videos, whatever - doing it repeatedly will help because otherwise, as a beginner, one can be lost for minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, etc. without finding awareness again. I've seen people on Dzogchen who, unfortunately, even though they got pointing out from great teachers, were not able to full internalize the practice because they got lost in thoughts and then never were able to find recognize awareness again, and so need the pointing out once more. Others get the pointing out repeatedly - practice a lot, and attain good results over time. In that way, from my perspective, having continual access to the teachings is very important.
Fortunately, we live in a good time for this.
I'll get to recommend specifics later but - this is my perspective - although some people say that you can't get transmission over recordings or the internet, or from books - I actually do doubt that that is that case, just from experience. But, I must caution that all of my experience in this realm comes from after the point in time that I received live pointing out, so I would not take what I say as gospel. Once again, anything I say would defer to a knowledge and reputable teacher.
This all being said - regardless of how one feels at a specific time or place, there's no reason to ever refrain from confirming one's experience or view against the words of masters. There are others that have said this, who have more experience, but until we are Buddhas ourselves and phenomena have exhausted, there is no reason to ever stop practicing. Ever. If you are practicing, there is no need to make effort, and all phenomena will come and go without trouble until they are fully exhausted. Namkhai Norbu says almost exactly this in The Cycle of Day and Night.

Finding A Teacher - Resources

"Do not expect to travel this path guided only by books and the internet! Use the internet to find a teacher, then connect with them." - Lama Lena
It's taken a while to get here, my apologies for that.
For finding a teacher, I think any lama that has accomplished a three year retreat will be proficient in either Mahamudra or Dzogchen (both Atiyoga - subtle differenes but the same essential practice), and will likely be able to give pointing out instructions.
Not all may do so at first. Some may want a more personal relationship, some may require Ngondro, and some may say "sorry I don't really give those teachings". Some may require a baseline knowledge of the practice first - for example the Tergar program does.
That being said, there are many places to receive pointing out for free and in public.
Off the top of my head, I can name four that are always open and free: Lama Lena on Facebook and Youtube, The Rangdrol Foundation (run by the reddit user u/jigdrol), MeditationOnline.org, and The Pristine Mind Foundation . I know there are others, but at least to me on reddit and personally, these have been the most visible. I do know that Yongey Mingyur Rinpoche and James Low occasionally give pointing out instructions and videos on the practice. As well - many other lama do on occasion, and especially Bon lamas - practitioners and Yogis from the Tibetan Indigenous religion, through teachings series or classes. Some may even do so if you are able to get a phone call with them.
Personally, I recommend finding someone who you can learn from personally, and allowing them to teach you whatever they can.
Edit: Here is a recent list of online teachers compiled by Dzogchen
Lama Lena Dzogchen Youtube Videos
Lama Lena Introductory Videos
Meditation Online Videos (Almost all Dzogchen)
Once you've received pointing out, there are also numerous public books, and texts one can read to deepen their understanding and/or background in the teachings, a few of which I've read and can list below. I'll also try to find some links that I care share too.
Many texts on Dzogchen, Mahyana and Vajrayana in general can be found on the excellent Lotsawahouse.org
A list of a few books that I've read and can personally recommend. Please note - these books (with the exception of Transcending AFAIK) are best read after having received transmission:
The Cycle of Day and Night by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Dzogchen: Heart Essence of the Great Perfection by HH The Dalai Lama
Zurchungpa's Testament by Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche
Vajra Heart Revisited by Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche
Transcending Ego: Distinguishing Consciousness from Wisdom by Thrangu Rinpoche
Also, I've not read the Trilogy of Rest by Longchenpa but heard that they're excellent.
Anyways, this about wraps up the post. If you have any questions or additional comments, they are very welcome. I wish all of your the very best of luck on your paths, and that all beings may reach enlightenment.

It's super BASIC, three-letter logo for a musician I work with. I can't seem to get the proportions right. Imagine Helvetica Neue SUPER BOLD, at a skew to the right, giving it a slightly modern/futuristic appeal. Need this for use on documents and media. We've already come up with the official look, so please no arguments on intellectual property, etc...
Will send an example whom is chosen. Would be genuinely surprised if it takes anyone more than an hour.
$25 quick lunch money.

I’ve been living with these two Ms for a year now and they are pretty much best friends (let’s call the Carlos and Joe). We all work in the same part of town in the same industry so know a lot of the same people. Lately, the vibes have changed. I feel like there’s this weird competition going on with them and it’s not like it’s at all obvious it’s so small that it make me go ‘huh that was strange’, and a number of times for me to start questioning it. I’m pretty sure (Carlos) has liked me for a while now but I’ve made it clear that I don’t want to date anyone in our field. Anyway the context. Examples: - The other day I was talking about dying my hair a certain colour and (Joes) was saying I could definitely pull it off and said ‘you should dye it (the) colour’ and (Carlos) is like ‘why do you want her to dye it that colour, what’s the reason you want her to look that way” and (joes) like wtf. It was awkward.. - Joe got invited to a dinner party by our mutual friend and Carlos would usually always be there but Joe said to me that I was invited too but he hadn’t told Carlos - Carlos and Joe have recently stopped hanging out together where as like last month they were inseparable - Last month Joe was really pissy with me and now he’s suddenly really nice, now Carlos is being a bit pissy but the also they’ve both been randomly awkward too - Carlos has started walking around the place shirtless all the time and upping his gym trips - the other night after a night of drinking Joe bit my finger when we were joking around with another friend
Am I delusional or is there something going on?? Our contracts ending soon so maybe that’s it.
TLDR: Is my gut instinct right about my roommates being into me and if so how do I keep thinks calm?
Thanks yall
**

We've been dating for just over a year now.
She's just so amazing- smart, funny, kind, I just love the way she sees the world and all the conversations we have. I feel like I really don't bring anything to the relationship, but she really seems to love me (and I love her) anyways. I'm scared I'm going to lose her because I'm not good enough.
I've gone back to school so I'm on a student budget for another year (though I'm set up with a good paying job once I graduate, and I have a degree so I have had corporate jobs before), but she's really well off (lawyer).
I keep telling her I'm happy just to spend time with her, and she doesn't need to spend money on me, but she loves going out and insists on paying for me. She also buys me all kinds of gifts, not even for special occasions, just because. I do buy her gifts I can afford, like flowers and the skincare products she like, and she seems to like it when I give her cards and draw or write letters inside them, but I feel like all the gifts I get her feel so cheap compared to the ones she gives me.
I try to plan nice dates, but I feel like her plans are always so much more elaborate. I don't want to invite her to anything involving money, because it would feel like I'm asking her to spend money on me.
I know I probably sound like a total loser, and maybe I'm selfish for staying with her, but I want to make her as happy as I can and I want to be the kind of boyfriend she deserves. All my past relationships felt more equal, but in this one I feel like I can't do anything that compares to everything she does for me. Any chance anyone has some advice?

I would love to play GW2, but I heard a lot of people saying that the game is much less popular than OSRS, WOW and FFIXV, but I find this curious, because GW2, everyone who plays it says it is the best of all MMORPGs, it doesn't do the least It makes sense for him to be the least popular of the brothers if he's the best of them all 🤯
I also heard that the lack of popularity is because the developer company's marketing is almost zero/very bad, I know that the game has its own launcher, but looking at its numbers of daily players on SteamDB it is very disappointing, even for new players. players know the game, these numbers are not at all inviting, for those who say that the number of players is not a quality, I disagree, it certainly is, you want to play singleplayer, we have Skyrim and Elder Ring, they are just “RPG”, without the term “MMO”, is not the case with GW2…
OSRS, for example, has horrible numbers on Steam because playing it without using the RuneLite launcher is horrible, but as far as I know, GW2 has no advantage over using another launcher, and most PC Gaming people prefer to unify your entire library on Steam
The only negative point of GW2 that I already point out even without playing it, is the issue of the company simply not caring about Brazil, even though it is a big player in the countries that play MMORPGs the most, the game simply does not have the Portuguese language, WOW in addition to having the language, it is still dubbed, besides it is one of the best game dubbings ever made in Brazilian Portuguese, so there is no point in making the argument that it wouldn't be worth it, if it wasn't worth it WOW wouldn't have taken all that care with it Brazil
The game even having subtitles in Spanish, but not in Portuguese, is simply a huge lack of respect from the company towards Brazilians

I just watched j perms tutorial for m2 and he didn’t cover this case so I’m wondering what to do
I/S and W/C are opposites so the way he explained it is if any of those 4 comes second in a pair, you swap to the opposite letter (HI for example will end up being HS because S is the opposite) but what do I do if it ends up being SI? Does it become SS or S?

Hi all, longtime listener, first-time caller. Please see my query and first 300 below.
My biggest question is this: 95% of the story takes place in 2014, but the book opens in 2020 when my main character receives a letter from the California Dept of Fair Housing & Employment informing her of an investigation into behavior at Chatpic. Receiving the letter spurs her to tell the story of what happened back then. The book checks back into 2020 in the middle as my MC tries to get more information about the investigation, and then it ends back in 2020 again when she decides what she wants to do about the letter.
The reason the story takes place in 2014 is because the time period--pre #MeToo/Donald Trump/the workplace reckoning of 2020--informs the decisions the MC makes back then, and she's looking back at it from a wiser perspective. If you've read The Rachel Incident, Caroline O'Donoghue does a similar thing as she retells a 2008 abortion story from the perspective of present day.
In the end, the investigation is not a driving force of the plot--so my question is how important is it that it's mentioned in the query? I ask because I've found that trying to add that piece to what I've already written starts to get convoluted, though obviously I can work at it. I think it's very clear once you read the first 300, but for agents who don't want a sample, is it clear in the blurb that this story is looking back to a time gone by?
Mostly looking for insight on this question specifically, but if you have further feedback about the letter for first 300, open to that as well. Thanks!
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Dear [Agent],
Thank you for the opportunity to submit my query for TERMS OF SERVICE, a true-ish fictional story about a young woman in a nearly impossible workplace a la UNCANNY VALLEY meets THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA (with shades of 9 TO 5). TERMS OF SERVICE is complete at 95,000 words.
It’s 2014 and down-and-out celebrity blogger Maggie Clarke is desperate for a fresh start. Not only is she broke in New York City, but at 31, she thought she’d be writing something a little less embarrassing than Justin Bieber listicles by now. When her longtime internet friend Aron York–recently named the world’s youngest billionaire–offers her a lucrative position at his massively popular social media app Chatpic that puts her at the center of his inner circle in Los Angeles, it’s exactly the step-up she’s been waiting for. As Maggie learns to manage the always-on hours, the slew of acronyms, and the unlimited access to free cold brew, she encounters another more complicated problem–the boys’ club. Except this isn’t the typical ham-fisted sexism she’s used to–this is the tech bro variety: insidious, inexorable, and infuriating. When she meets an ambitious young reporter who encourages her to speak out, Maggie has a shot at revenge. But in a world before mansplaining and microaggressions, is blowing the whistle worth the risk? And is anyone ready to hear it?
Like Maggie, I was also plucked from internet obscurity by the world’s (then) youngest billionaire, [redacted], to come work at his massively popular social media app, [redacted company]. I was a founding member of the company’s content team, and all I have to show for it is six footnotes in the [redacted company] biography [redacted title] and the brutal feminist awakening that inspired me to write this manuscript. Before that, I was a full-time writer in New York whose work has appeared on MTV, Rolling Stone and Elle. Currently I’m a content and editorial consultant in Chicago, and I’m also on TikTok where 21,000 people watch me rant about work and office culture. (It’s also where 2M people enjoyed my show-and-tell video about the “sentimental” stock certificates [redacted company previously mentioned] gave a few early employees–that were worth exactly $0.00.)
As the agent who represents [Author 1] and [Author 2], you have a strong list when it comes to complex female characters embroiled in complicated social dynamics. TERMS OF SERVICE would be a great addition to this track because, while similar themes of class and workplace are explored, my flavor of levity and sarcasm makes my work distinct from [Author 1] and [Author 2], bringing a new facet to your program.
If you are interested in reading TERMS OF SERVICE, I would be happy to forward a sample of any length you suggest. Thank you for your consideration!
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
First 300:
Chapter 1
2020
A lot of people might revel in the idea of receiving a letter announcing an investigation into their ex-employer.
One might, for example, envision draping themselves in a mink stole, lighting the cigarette at the end of their old-timey cigarette holder, and dialing the investigator’s number from a rotary phone atop a solid wood desk under shadowy, film noir lights. One might then imagine whispering I knew this day would come into the receiver between bursts of psychotic, hysterical laughter as they rejoiced in the long overdue arrival of the long arm of the law.
But me, I wasn’t so sure. Maybe because I didn’t have a mink stole.
No, I was crouched on the ground of my parents’ musky basement in Des Plaines, Illinois, knee-deep in piles of old diaries and CDs when I received notice of one such letter. It was month four of COVID, and Dad and I were only halfway through his cleaning list. He was already a germaphobe so a global pandemic was all he needed to justify a top-to-bottom disinfection of the entire house. And since my routine trip home in the middle of March turned into a hapless extended stay when the world shut down, it was the perfect excuse to put me to work. Just like the good old days.
We wiped down every square inch of the place. We soaked the faucet heads in lemon juice, we scrubbed the coffee mugs with baking soda. We vacuumed the damn fridge.
Reorganizing the basement shelves was a beast. Every box was like a Russian nesting doll of useless crap: old TV Guides, corroded double-A batteries, dried-out cans of paint primer, an unsettling number of hand saws. I made decent headway through the “tools” and “electronics,” but I lost all steam when I got to my high school stuff—faded Polaroids and folded-up notes stopped me in my tracks.

Hi there!
Is there an option to have Google calendar invites that come from my delegated access calendar to myself come to my inbox?
For example: I’m sending an invite from a calendar that I have delegate access to (not my calendar), to myself (my calendar), but I do not get the email notifications to my inbox on behalf of that delegated access calendar that an invite has been sent nor an email notification to my inbox once I’ve accepted.
Thanks in advance!

I've been struggling with OCD intrusive thoughts for a while, and part of this problem is my bad habit of constantly checking these compulsions, such as repeating certain words and asking for reassurance from other people when these intrusive thoughts come up to ensure I haven't acted on them. It drives me crazy because I fear I will lose control and act on my intrusive thoughts, leading to devastating results.
For example, sometimes when I am in public, I am afraid I might start yelling inappropriate things, or when I am on the phone with someone during an appointment, I am scared that I swore or cursed at them. When I am around friends, I am afraid I called them stupid, said they suck, or that I don't want to hang out anymore and to not invite me anymore. I have a fear of acting on these intrusive thoughts. It's worse when texting people; I am scared I will say inappropriate things and send that message.
My friends have noticed that something is wrong, and I told them about my OCD. They are very supportive and understanding. However, I do want to lessen this reassurance-seeking and the compulsions since they are so unhealthy. The reassurance is only a temporary relief and comes back again. What are some things you do to lessen this, and can you offer some suggestions to help me? Thanks.

P1. In many situations, different actions by various parties could prevent an undesired outcome.
P2. Legal systems assign responsibility based on reasonable expectations of behavior within a given context.
P3. Personal accountability involves what an individual can do to avoid an outcome, independent of others' actions.
P4. Discussing an individual's role in causing an outcome does not absolve others of their responsibilities.
P5. Labeling the focus on personal accountability as "victim blaming" discourages individuals from recognizing their potential actions to prevent similar outcomes.
C. Therefore, society inhibits problem-solving by using the term "victim blaming."
Example:
Hypothetically a person lives in a dangerous area with his son. He tells his son to dress a certain way and carry self defense items. Perhaps his son's ethnicity will invite trouble, or certain wearables will too.
After doing that the dad volunteers to help reform the education system in the area, and speak to the community.
The son still decides to wear a tank top and flashy expensive items. The son gets hurt and robbed. The father yells at him for not being smarter. The father encourages better judgement in the future. The son listens and it doesn't happen again.
The father eventually plays a role in the community evolving morally, but it takes 30 years.
If we yelled at the dad for "victim blaming" his son might have gotten hurt again. That's my main point. It's this balance of larger change and personal accountability. Thoughts on this?
Edit:
Popular responses include

1. The official definition of victim blaming versus how it's commonly used. I think even under the official definition, putting any responsibility on the victim for the small amount they are in control of, mistakenly seems to exonerate the perpetrator. This is still a false dichotomy to think either you are 100% responsible or they are 100% responsible. They are 100% responsible legally. You are 100% responsible for your own safety in my opinion and an internal locus of control is healthy.
   
2. Street smarts may not have been captured in my example correctly, but I would argue it does exist and the individual does have some level of control over outcomes. The totality of street smarts is nuanced but real, even if my example wasn't the best.
   
3. "What can I rationally and reasonably do to prevent an outcome I don't want." Is the idea behind personal accountability. This is not an attempt to demand unreasonable precautions. This post is pointing out that when we ask this question at all, it's shamed as victim blaming, and stops problem solving. It's to say you can learn martial arts if you don't want to get hit. It is not saying other people won't try to hit you, or they shouldn't face consequences if they do.
   
4. Short term and long term solutions. It is a false dichotomy to think that your attempts to keep yourself safe in the short term demand that you not engage in long term solutions as well. In fact, being safe does help you have more time to work on long term systematic solutions.
   

This idea is explored in the article below:
https://chipstero7.wordpress.com/2023/05/24/is-baphomet-an-esoteric-representation-of-jesus-christ/
Quote from a bit of it:
One possibility is that the male aspect of Baphomet represents Osiris and the female aspect represents Isis. In the book ‘The Hidden Faces of Eve’, it’s said that the myth of Osiris and Isis does not alter in essence from Adam and Eve. In Kabbalah circles, Adam was originally an androgynous being they called Adam-Kadmon — consisting of male and female aspects — but was fractured into opposites during The Fall. ‘Adam’ being representative of humanity as a whole — we were all fractured. In the Gnostic and Hermetic school of thought — the goal of human existence is to merge these opposites (the female and male) back into one androgynous being to form an Adam-Kadmon. Adam-Kadmon is described as “divine light without vessels” and as a “composite of pure light” much like how Baphomet is described as being a representation of Astral Light. Professor Hugh Schonfield argues that the bearded male head referred to by the Templars is the head of Adam-Kadmon. In Hebrew, this head is denominated as Chokmah or Wisdom. Something similar was proposed by Pierre Klossowski in his book ‘Le Baphomet’, saying: “The Baphomet has diverse etymologies… the three phonemes that constitute the denomination are also said to signify, in coded fashion, Basileus philosophorum metaloricum: The sovereign of metallurgical philosophers, that is, of the alchemical laboratories that were supposedly established in various chapters of the Temple. The androgynous nature of the figure apparently goes back to the Adam-Kadmon of the Chaldeans, which one finds in the Zohar”. According to the Wikipedia ‘Adam-Kadmon’ page, Apostle Paul belived that “Adam-Kadmon is the pre-existent Logos, incarnate as the man Jesus Christ”. Baphomet’s connection with Christ and Adam also extends to the Baphomet sigil created 200 years ago which shows the names of Adam and Eve on one side with the name of Christ in Hebrew surrounding it. On the opposite side are the names Samael and Lilith. Éliphas’ depiction of Baphomet also included an upright pentagram, the same as the Adam and Eve Baphomet sigil below (which is surrounded by the name of Christ)
The connections between Christ and Baphomet are not widely recognized or agreed upon, but esoteric interpretations have been proposed. For example, in his book ‘Baphomet of Éliphas Lévi’, Abraxas Aletheia argues that Baphomet is an esoteric symbol of Christ, saying: “Contrary to popular belief, Baphomet is an image of an esoteric Jesus Christ created from a composite of alchemical, Kabbalistic and Christian symbols”. One such connection symbolically between Baphomet and Christ can be found in Baphomet’s caducous which matches the Christogram which is a monogram or combination of letters that forms an abbreviation for Christ’s name. One of Baphomet’s most recognizable symbols is the pentagram emblazoned on its forehead. The pentagram is commonly associated with Christ. In Christian tradition, the pentagram is seen as a symbolic connection to the five wounds of Christ. In certain esoteric traditions, the pentagram has been linked to the planet Venus, called the Morning Star or the Evening Star, depending on its appearance in the sky. This is of relevance, because Christ describes himself as the bright Morning Star in the Book of Revelation (22:16). One of the earliest connections between Baphomet and Christ can be found in the mythology surrounding the Knights Templar, a medieval Christian military order. Some have suggested that the Baphomet head that the Knights Templars venerated was the head of Christ. In her book ‘The Templars: The Secret History Revealed’, Barbara Frale says: “The last point raised in the indictment against the Templars concerned the secret veneration of an idol in the shape of a bearded head. There is clear evidence of the existence of image of Christ in the religious life of the order, as well as a mysterious cult devoted to the Sacred Blood”. Frale’s essentially suggesting that the Baphomet head was that of Christ. This same idea was the subject of the book ‘The Head of God: The Lost Treasure of the Templars’, by Keith Laidler.

How we could save Star Trek: Lower Decks and create Star Trek: Legacy

Mike O'Sullivan • May 2024 • mike@cerritosenterprises.com
Executive summary
We can save Lower Decks and create Legacy, but it will take more than appeals to Paramount. It will take money. These series can be fostered by a group of business savvy Star Trek fans. It would be a profit making venture that could also give Star Trek fans more of what they want.
Key takeaways:

• I'm not being a downer, but we need to face reality.
• Letter writing campaigns and petitions will not save Lower Decks or create Legacy.
• Doing so would take money.
• Investors could make a good profit from those shows.
• I propose here a plan that is a long shot but could work.

Historical background
Star Trek TOS was the first show ever extended because of a letter writing campaign. NBC and Desilu executives were impressed enough by the campaign to extend the show one more season.
At the time, determining television ratings was a young science. Shows were only rated by percent of total viewers. Demographics were not taken into account. Only a few years later, NBC executives realized that Star Trek was actually a big hit. It attracted young, middle class Americans… one of the most sought after markets in the world. Ever since then, Star Trek has had a symbiotic but complicated relationship with fans and networks.
Recent background
Unlike TV ratings in the 1960s, streaming services know quite a bit about viewership. They know which shows are popular and the demographics of those viewers. They know exactly how much money each show is bringing in. Apparently, Star Trek isn't doing well enough to attract their investment dollars.
Paramount is in the midst of serious financial difficulties. Their stock has declined by 50% in the last year. Their streaming service, Paramount+, lost $490 million last year, which was an improvement over the previous year when they lost about $575 million. All of Paramount's revenue streams are down, they're over leveraged, and they have a cash flow problem. [https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/paramount-streaming-loss-subs-1235838684/] Paramount is struggling to make ends meet, so they're making cuts. We wish they weren't cutting back on Star Trek, but tough decisions have to be made.
Executives presumably already knew that there would be campaigns to save Lower Decks and create Legacy. They've already taken that into account. Unless a campaign is overwhelming, it's unlikely to change their minds.
The plan
It's important to understand that this plan is based on profit, not fandom. While there is certainly a place in the world of commerce for doing something because it's cool, profit is the engine that drives business.
I propose here a plan in which a group of investors form a company devoted to investing in Star Trek. This plan would reduce Paramount's risk while leveraging the popularity of Star Trek. As business ventures go, the plan would be relatively low risk because it only moves forward if certain contracts could be arranged. However, even with contracts signed, it would take a significant investment to get the cameras rolling.
First, let's look at some numbers. I'm working from memory here, but I think these numbers are close enough for an overview of the situation.
It costs about $3 million to produce an episode of Lower Decks. It costs about $8 million for an episode of Discovery, so Legacy would probably cost around the same amount. For the purposes of this discussion, we'll only look at Lower Decks. The same principles would apply to Legacy on a larger scale. A ten episode season of Lower Decks would therefore cost around $30 million. Hollywood accounting can get tricky… an expense item can get allocated among multiple projects that might not seem related. Therefore, a per-episode estimate is fuzzy and doesn't necessarily extrapolate into a season-long budget. We'll go with a season budget of $30 million here. Reality will adjust those numbers as necessary.
In terms of corporate structure, there are two Paramount divisions involved in producing Lower Decks: Paramount Studios and Paramount+. This plan drops Paramount+ out of the equation, instead relying on other streaming services like Netflix.
So let's get to the actual plan.
A group of investors would form a company called Cerritos Enterprises. Those investors would probably be Star Trek fans… the tech world is filled with Trekkies. However, remember that this is a profit making endeavor, so fanship isn't a requirement.
Cerritos Enterprises wouldn't initially need to raise a huge amount of money (as startups go). $1 million would probably be a good start, enough to show that the company is a real, established startup that's ready to do business. They would need to provide evidence that they can raise more funds if the deal goes forward. That makes it relatively low risk because more money isn't invested until there are signed contracts. (I'm going to stop saying "relatively" every time I say "low risk". Just assume the risk is always relative to the general risk of any business startup.)
Having established credibility, Cerritos Enterprises makes proposals to two companies: Paramount and a streaming service, say Netflix.
To Paramount, they propose hiring Paramount Studios to produce Lower Decks. That would appeal to Paramount because it would be low risk: they don't have to proceed until they have at least some cash in hand.
To Netflix they propose that Netflix would carry the show. Netflix would be the biggest risk taker: they can't know for sure how popular the show would be on their platform. However, Netflix is in a good position to take risks. They made $5.4 billion profit last year, up from the previous year. In fact, they have been consistently profitable every year since 2011. [https://www.businessofapps.com/data/netflix-statistics/] They're a good candidate for a risky entertainment venture.
The proposals involve sharing expenses. Each player would contribute money. For example, Cerritos Enterprises would kick in $10 million, as would Paramount and Netflix. Paramount's investment would be in-kind… they produce the show with the knowledge that Netflix is already ready to buy. Netflix would need to kick in some money before delivery to get production going.
Allocating profits would get complicated. Paramount might want more than just payment for producing the show; they would want revenue based on the popularity of the show. Netflix might not be satisfied with just adding a great show to their platform: they might want a share of merchandising or of future expansion of the franchise. All of that would have to be worked out.
If we go with these numbers, Cerritos Enterprises would need to pony up about $10 million. To give some perspective, $25 million is considered the sweet spot for first round investment in a tech startup. Most startups fail, so an investment of $10 million in a low risk venture wouldn't phase the world of investors. It has a better promise of profit at a lower investment than most startups.
In terms of who would put up the money, we can generally divide investors into two categories: macroinvestors and microinvestors.
Macroinvestors are the peoplecompanies that put up millions of dollars for a venture. They're often called "angel investors'' because they put money into projects that most people wouldn't view as promising. Angel investors would form the bulk of investment.
I would love to see the project include Star Trek fans (like me) as microinvestors. However, that might be difficult or impossible. Securities and Exchange Commission regulations make it difficult for small investors to get in on startups. (Personal note: this is a situation that I think should change. Little guys like me should be able to get in on the action.) You can't just crowdfund a project by selling equity. That being said, fans could be a promising source of money. Trekkies probably skew towards higher incomes, and they're passionate about the franchise they love. I'm sure quite a few fans (like me) would make small investments just for the sheer excitement of getting involved in Star Trek. If for no other reason, I would like to see Cerritos Enterprises include microinvestors so the fan base could have more say in the future of our franchise. A company like MicroVentures (https://microventures.com/) might be able to help implement microinvestment.
Cerritos Enterprises would benefit from having a Star Trek star on the board of directors. Jonathan Frakes would be a good choice. Not only is he beloved by the Star Trek community, he's an experienced director and producer. He knows the business. He could attract Trekkie investors, then he could talk business with them. George Takei is also an experienced entertainment producer. There are probably other business savvy stars who could get involved.
Conclusion
Entertainment industry professionals will undoubtedly find flaws in this plan. That's a good thing: it helps make the plan better. However, Hollywood is like any other industry: money talks. A pile of cash on the table will get their attention.
This is an ambitious plan, but Trekkies are an innovative group. Making things happen is what we do.
Let's make this happen.
Mike O'Sullivan [mike@cerritosenterprises.com](mailto:mike@cerritosenterprises.com) Star Trek fan