Little Stepsister
🔞 ALL INFORMATION CLICK HERE 👈🏻👈🏻👈🏻
Little Stepsister
Main Page
All Pages
Community
Interactive Maps
Recent Blog Posts
Pachirapong Wiki
Thomas O'Malley
Duchess
Godzilla (Monsters)
Princess
Tom Sawyer
Becky Thatcher
Main Page
All Pages
Community
Interactive Maps
Recent Blog Posts
Pachirapong Wiki
Thomas O'Malley
Duchess
Godzilla (Monsters)
Princess
Tom Sawyer
Becky Thatcher
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.
Explore properties
Fandom
Cortex RPG
Muthead
Futhead
Fanatical
Follow Us
Overview
What is Fandom?
About
Careers
Press
Contact
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Global Sitemap
Local Sitemap
Community
Community Central
Support
Help
Do Not Sell My Info
Advertise
Media Kit
Fandomatic
Contact
Fandom Apps
Take your favorite fandoms with you and never miss a beat.
Pachirapong Wiki is a FANDOM Movies Community.
Boards are the best place to save images and video clips. Collect, curate and comment on your files.
Unable to complete your request at this time. Please try again later or contact us if the issue continues.
Images Creative Editorial Video Creative Editorial
Best match Newest Oldest Most popular
Any date Last 24 hours Last 48 hours Last 72 hours Last 7 days Last 30 days Last 12 months Custom date range
Release not important Released/No release required
Online only Offline only Online and offline
6,260 Little Sister Premium Video Footage
© 2022 Getty Images. The Getty Images design is a trademark of Getty Images.
Access the best of Getty Images and iStock with our simple subscription plan . Millions of high-quality images, video, and music options are waiting for you.
Tap into Getty Images' global scale, data-driven insights, and network of more than 340,000 creators to create content exclusively for your brand .
Streamline your workflow with our best-in-class digital asset management system . Organize, control, distribute and measure all of your digital content.
Grow your brand authentically by sharing brand content with the internet’s creators.
When My Little Sister Wants to Play 'Doctor'
We use cookies and related technologies to help identify you and your devices,
enhance your experience and conduct advertising and analysis.
By choosing "Accept", or by using this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
You can read more about how The Mighty uses cookies in our Cookie Notice .
My sister is 10 years old, and we all try to encourage her to use her imagination and play. In this day and age, I feel like sometimes everyone (including kids) are too busy looking at screens for entertainment instead of entertaining themselves. I try to explain to her that I wish I felt like doing all the things she can, but having chronic fatigue syndrome leaves me very limited.
Naturally, she wants to play games and do things with me. We might play a game on the card table, where I can lay in the chair on the heating pad. She plays restaurant and brings me food. She made her own menu and everything. Then we swap roles and I bring her fake food.
However, after we were done playing restaurant, she wanted to play doctor. This may sound silly, possibly petty or even me just being plain sensitive. I told her alright, we can play that. She asks me why I am there, and of course, playing doctor is no fun if there is nothing wrong with you. Right? It makes sense for a kid to want to have something wrong with the other. That is what playing doctor is anyway.
I just kept hoping she would not bring up my illness. She had done it in the past. She had asked why I was there and even had a cure for it. I wish she did, I guess she wished so too. I had to explain to her over and over how it works. Do I expect her to perfectly understand? Of course not. But it sometimes seems like she does not believe me.
In the end, all she did was say I had strep throat. She then “removed” my tonsils later.
Every time she asks if I want to play doctor, my stomach drops. I am sick of doctors. I am sick of going to doctors with all sorts of things wrong with me and being told there is either nothing they can do or they do not believe me.
I hate that I am this way, and I hate that the very thought of playing doctor fills me with such dread and fear.
I hate that I am 22 years old, and I have enough diagnoses on my chart that it takes up many pages.
I hate that the smallest thing like this triggers all these emotions. I hate explaining it, so I typically don’t.
When my younger sister wants to play doctor, I do. I play with her. I swallow these emotions, because the last thing I need to do is make her feel like she needs to walk on eggshells.
I try my best to not let everything affect me personally, like when people that say, “if you do not have a wheelchair, you should not use the handicap parking.”
It’s those who refuse to believe someone as young as me can relate on a personal level to my grandmother and have numerous health problems.
It’s those using my illness as a joke or a fake reason not to have a job.
It’s those people who direct something at one population, and yet I get offended.
I feel like ableism is real, but I also feel I need to remember not everyone is aware. I was not aware til I got sick at 19. I was not aware of the world of chronic illness.
Educate those around you. Spread awareness not just for the illness you personally have, but the whole spoonie world.
We want to hear your story. Become a Mighty contributor .
CFS/ME, Fibromyalgia, and Scoliosis. Possibly IBS. Depression. Married, 24. Taurus and INFJ. Demi.
Oops! It appears you entered an invalid email.
© 2022 Mighty Proud Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy
|
Terms
Therapists
:
Login
|
Sign Up
United States
Austin, TX
Brooklyn, NY
Chicago, IL
Denver, CO
Houston, TX
Los Angeles, CA
New York, NY
Portland, OR
San Diego, CA
San Francisco, CA
Seattle, WA
Washington, DC
Mental Health
Addiction
Anxiety
ADHD
Asperger's
Autism
Bipolar Disorder
Chronic Pain
Depression
Eating Disorders
Personality
Passive Aggression
Personality
Shyness
Personal Growth
Goal Setting
Happiness
Positive Psychology
Stopping Smoking
Relationships
Low Sexual Desire
Relationships
Sex
Family Life
Child Development
Parenting
Talk to Someone
Find a Therapist
Find a Treatment Center
Find a Psychiatrist
Find a Support Group
Find Teletherapy
Trending Topics
Coronavirus Disease 2019
Narcissism
Dementia
Bias
Affective Forecasting
Neuroscience
Are you a Therapist?
Get Listed Today
Get Help
Find a Therapist
Find a Treatment Center
Find a Psychiatrist
Find a Support Group
Find Teletherapy
Members
Login
Sign Up
United States
Austin, TX
Brooklyn, NY
Chicago, IL
Denver, CO
Houston, TX
Los Angeles, CA
New York, NY
Portland, OR
San Diego, CA
San Francisco, CA
Seattle, WA
Washington, DC
Mental Health
Addiction
Anxiety
ADHD
Asperger's
Autism
Bipolar Disorder
Chronic Pain
Depression
Eating Disorders
Personality
Passive Aggression
Personality
Shyness
Personal Growth
Goal Setting
Happiness
Positive Psychology
Stopping Smoking
Relationships
Low Sexual Desire
Relationships
Sex
Family Life
Child Development
Parenting
Talk to Someone
Find a Therapist
Find a Treatment Center
Find a Psychiatrist
Find a Support Group
Find Teletherapy
Trending Topics
Coronavirus Disease 2019
Narcissism
Dementia
Bias
Affective Forecasting
Neuroscience
The question is not whether you’ll change; you will. Research clearly shows that everyone’s personality traits shift over the years, often for the better. But who we end up becoming and how much we like that person are more in our control than we tend to think they are.
Posted April 28, 2008
|
Reviewed by Devon Frye
Fellow "Experiments in Philosophy " blogger Jesse Prinz posted about UVA psychologist Jon Haidt's work on political differences. I want to continue exploring the philosophical implications of Haidt's work by asking whether it's all right for Julie and her brother Mark to have sex .
Here's a scenario drawn from a study Haidt conducted:
"Julie and Mark are brother and sister. They are traveling together in France on summer vacation from college. One night, they are staying alone in a cabin near the beach. They decide that it would be interesting and fun if they tried making love. At the very least, it would be a new experience for each of them. Julie was already taking birth control pills, but Mark uses a condom, too, just to be safe. They both enjoy making love, but they decide never to do it again. They keep that night as a special secret, which makes them feel even closer to each other. What do you think about that? Was it okay for them to make love?"
If you're like most people, your response is "absolutely not," but you'll find it more difficult than you think to come up with a justification. "Genetic defects from inbreeding." Yes, but they were using two forms of birth control. (And in the vanishingly small chance of pregnancy , Julie can get an abortion.) "It will mess them up emotionally." On the contrary, they enjoyed the act and it brought them closer together. "It's illegal." Not in France. "It's disgusting." For you, maybe, but not for them (obviously). Do you really want to say that private acts are morally wrong just because a lot of people find those acts disgusting? And so on.
The scenario, of course, is designed to ward off the most common moral objections to incest, and in doing so demonstrate that much of moral reasoning is a post-hoc affair—a way of justifying judgments that you've already reached though an emotional gut response to a situation. Although we like to think of ourselves as arriving at our moral judgments after painstaking rational deliberation (or at least some kind of deliberation) Haidt's model—the "social intuititionist model"—sees the process as just the reverse. We judge and then we reason. Reason is the press secretary of the emotions, as Haidt is fond of saying—the ex post facto spin doctor of beliefs we've arrived at through a largely intuitive process.
As Haidt recognizes, his theory can be placed within a grand tradition of moral psychology and philosophy—a return to an emphasis on the emotions which began in full force with the work of Scottish philosophers Adam Smith and David Hume. Although the more rationalist theories of Piaget and Kohlberg were dominant for much of the twentieth century, Haidt-style views have gained more and more adherents over the last 10 years. Which leads to the question: are there any philosophical/ethical implications of this model, should it be the right one? Plenty, in my view, and I'll conclude this post by mentioning just a few of them.
First, although Haidt may disagree (see my interview with him for a discussion about this issue), I believe Haidt's model supports a subjectivist view about the nature of moral beliefs. My thinking is as follows: We arrive at our judgments through our emotionally charged intuitions—intuitions that do not track any kind of objective moral truth, but instead are artifacts of our biological and cultural histories. Haidt's model reveals that there is quite a bit of self-deception bound up in moral beliefs and practice. The strength of these intuitions leads us to believe that the truth of our moral judgments is "self-evident"—think: the Declaration of Independence—in other words, that they correspond to an objective moral reality of some kind. That is why we try so hard to justify them after the fact. But we have little to no reason to believe that this moral reality exists.
(I should add that contrary to the views of newspaper columnists across the country, claiming that a view might lead to moral relativism or subjectivism is not equivalent to saying that the view is false. This is not a reductio ad absurdum . If Haidt's model is vindicated scientifically, and it does indeed entail that moral relativism or subjectivism is true, then we have to accept it. Rejecting a theory just because you feel uncomfortable about its implications is a far more skeptical or nihilistic stance than anything I've discussed in this post.)
Second, and less abstractly, I think it would make sense to subject our own values to far more critical scrutiny than we're accustomed to doing. If Haidt is right, our values may not be on the secure footing that we believe them to be. We could very well find that upon reflection, many of our values do not reflect our considered beliefs about what makes for a good life.
It's important to note that Haidt does not claim that it's impossible for reason to change our moral values or the values of others. He just believes that this kind of process happens far less frequently than we believe—and furthermore, that when values are affected by reason, it is because reason triggers a new emotional response which, in turn, starts a new chain of justification.
Finally, I think we might become a little more tolerant of the moral views of others (within limits, of course—sometimes too much tolerance is tantamount to suicide ). Everyone is morally motivated, as Haidt says: liberals should stop thinking of conservatives as motivated only by greed and racism . And conservatives should stop thinking of liberals as—as Jesse Prinz puts it in his post—"either tree-hugging fools or calculating agents of moral degeneracy."
More importantly, if Haidt is correct, we must recognize even the people we consider to be the epitome of pure evil—the Islamic fundamentalists who engineered 9/11, for example—are motivated by moral goals , however distorted we find them to be. As Haidt told me in our interview:
"One of the most psychologically stupid things anyone ever said is that the 9/11 terrorists did this because they hate our freedom. That's just idiotic. Nobody says: 'They're free over there. I hate that. I want to kill them.' They did this because they hate us; they're angry at us for many reasons, and terrorism a
Korean Movie Sex Mom
New Porn Actress 2022
Panty Stocking With Garterbel