parrygripp (
parrygripp) wrote in
bakerstreet2026-01-21 05:11 pm
listen to your heart 😌
"Can You Handle Your Emotions?"
Emotions are... eh. We all have them, whether we want to or not. Some people have control over their emotions, and some people let their emotions control them.
Where does your character fall on this spectrum?
More importantly, what's their relationship with their emotions like? Do they bury everything deep, deep down inside, or are they the first one to cry over a sappy movie? Do they even know how they feel about what's going on inside?
Pretty meta stuff.
- No blank top-levels.
- Instead, characters are to respond to the proposed question: can you handle your emotions? / are you in touch with your feelings?
- Get deep. Look within. Hear, think feel... or don't.

no subject
Not all of us have the luxury of being able to put those emotions on front street and not have repercussions as a result.
I care about people. It doesn't get much more complicated for me than that and if that's the standard for nurturing, that feels lacking.
My feeling has always been that standing by when I can do something is its own kind of sin. Inaction is inexcusable at times.
no subject
It's not about luxury, it's about chemistry, I'm not built for emotional repression. But I can control when and how they are expressed.
I think about nurturing like the bird allegory, it's a kind of predisposition. You come across a wounded bird on the side of the road and your first thought is that it's vulnerable. What do you do?
I'm not going to say you're wrong, you're barometer is different, but I disagree with the foundation. "Sin." Sin is burning fuel for guilt which is a conditioned emotional response based on a belief system. It's not a bad way to be if that's who you are, but it's not evidence that action is required.
no subject
If you can control it, wouldn't that be a minor form of repression all its own? Everyone does in some ways and it's just a matter of degrees.
I don't understand how that's a question. I help the bird, obviously.
I don't necessarily mean sin in the eyes of God but there is something of a social sin as well in the idea that I think there's an inherent selfishness not doing what we can when we can. Recognizing that personal circumstances are limiting, if people have the means, they should help the bird.
no subject
And that instinct is just as as viable as the primal rejection of vulnerability. Others might ignore or crush the bird to eliminate weakness.
I'm not opposed to helping the bird, but I consider the circumstances.
no subject
The primal rejection of vulnerability feels like a rejection of some measure of humanity. The destruction of an innocent thing simply because it's weak feels sociopathic to me.
Sure, there are circumstances. If the bird is dangling on a ledge of a skyscraper, there are things to weigh but ultimately if there is no cost, then the decision not to be kind is condemning.