xX💖🌹Xx_dolly_Angelic_xX🌹💖Xx
LightNews LightNews
banner
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
xX💖🌹Xx_dolly_Angelic_xX🌹💖Xx
@dollyeldritch.bsky.social
1K followers 630 following 3.6K posts
[Please use the lower-case 'd'; it is intentional <3 ]

Dr. Elle Henderson. Conversation analyst. Ethnomethodologist. Feminist. Deviant. R18, often hornyposting. Opinions my own.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Elle-Henderson-2?ev=hdr_xprf
Posts Replies Media Videos
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
The Fifa peace trophy. A representation of fascism's reliance on death. The Earth in the hands of death. The hands of death guided by the peace award winner. Voidout first, then peace delivered.
December 5, 2025 at 9:15 PM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
I have adhd'd myself into having taken on responsibilities for tomorrow at the last minute and over estimating what I can accomplish in an evening. I still have to finish writing the quiz I volunteered to do and wrap stuff. I haven't had dinner yet lol 🙃
Picture of me holding a plate with three chocolate chip cookies with chocolate icing and sprinkles and four cupcakes with pink icing and sprinkles. Most of the sprinkles are pinks, reds, and whites, but some items have some more coloured sprinkles too. I have written over the image in fuchsia coloured text "it's 1:14am, still quite a bit to do, but look at these!" With an arrow pointing to the plate. Closer up picture of the baked goods plate from the other image. I've written in yellow text on the image "theyre accidentally a bit romantic for a work christmas morning tea lol"
December 4, 2025 at 12:30 PM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
um hii im like incredibly cute, just saying 😇🩷😇🩷😇🩷😇🩷😇
Selfie of me standing in front of a grey-white wall. I'm wearing a pink button up shirt beneath a deeper reddish pinkish dress. And my pink collar. I'm doing the reverse peace sign finger gesture.
December 3, 2025 at 12:42 AM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
If you see this post a pic from your gallery to describe your mental health.
Picture of Sam bridges from DS2. Camera is looking downward slightly at him over is right side. He is turned towards the camera and looking up at the camera with a big goofy smile doing a thumbs up. He has a black oily blob creature with two small yellow eyes on his head.
November 26, 2025 at 5:51 AM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
So, i'd say that processing time is a members' accounting resource but can't serve us as analysts. The timing of cognitive processes (if we are to presume their reality and temporality) is not "scenic" to the person (as per Garfinkel).
There is a great temptation to treat studies of practical, communicative activities and interactions as opportunities for cognitivistic speculation. Ethnomethodological talk of ‘practical reasoning’ appears to lend itself to such speculation, and such a direction has been explicitly embraced by Aaron Cicourel in his ‘cognitive sociology’ (Cicourel, 1974). On the whole, however, most practitioners of ethnomethodological inquiry do not conceive of themselves as contributing to cognitive theorizing, following instead Garfinkel’s famous dictum: . . . there is no reason to look under the skull since nothing of interest is to be found there but brains . . . Indeed questions will be confined to the operations that can be performed upon events that are ‘scenic’ to the person. (Garfinkel, 1990: 6)
November 25, 2025 at 9:22 AM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
In Conversation and Cognition, Jeff Coulter's chapter addresses that by critiquing the same in things Schegloff wrote.
Schegloff comments: He [Sacks] argues that, if they were finding ‘who is being addressed’ by finding to whom the address term referred, then they would find no solution. Rather, he argues, they first use sequencing rules to find whom the current speaker would properly be addressing, and they use the product of that analysis in deciding how the address termis properly to be interpreted. He is thus able to sort out the order in which these analyses are conducted – first, addressee, then address term – and it turns out to be just the opposite from what one might have thought. (ibid.) In the passage above, Schegloff attributes several ‘shadow actions’ (I owe this term to Wes Sharrock, who is not responsible for the argument being developed here). That is, Schegloff attributes to speaker-hearers: (1) the production of an ‘analysis’, (2) ‘deciding’, (3) ‘interpreting’ and (4) ‘sorting out the order in which these analyses are conducted’. None of these describe anything that the speaker-hearers in question could be said to have actually done: they are without criterial satisfaction in the instances being inspected. This does not inhibit Schegloff from ascribing them, however. On what grounds? The only ‘warrant’ (the scarequotes are very deliberate here) could be forthcoming from the tacit (in Schegloff’s case, explicit) adherence to cognitivist assumptions – the analyzing, deciding, interpreting and sorting of analyses are ‘cognitive operations’. They are mental processes (or mental practices) accompanying their ‘scenic’ activities in the setting. I shall return to consider Sacks’ analysis further on. Schegloff goes on to consider another analysis of Sacks’: the use of the ‘possessive pronoun’. He comments: Sacks argues that a hearer/receiver must first determine that what ‘my’ is attached to is a ‘possessable’ – the sort of thing which in that culture can be possessed (rather than a category from a membership categorization device, for example), in order to decide that ‘my’ is being used to claim possession. Once again, an ordering of analyses – of cognitive operations – seems clearly involved. (Schegloff, 1992c: xxxviii – emphasis added) But once again, the inference to the presence of ‘cognitive operations’ is itself only a function of the illicit introduction of ‘shadow actions’ into the characterization of the issue. What evidence is there within the actions of the speaker-hearers that they go through iterative ‘operations’ of ‘determining’ and ‘deciding’ things about the use of ‘my’? Since there is none, then their ‘determinings’ and ‘decidings’ are postulated as mental or cognitive processes.
November 25, 2025 at 9:22 AM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
Of course they already take cognitive accounts for granted as useful. Their choice of OIRs for this study is based on the idea that OIRs are preceded by a bunch of prior cognitive activities making them more cognitively demanding (leading, along with preference to delays).
First, turns marked by OIRs induce extra cognitive processing. The interlocutoridentifies, diagnoses, and attempts to cognitively ’repair’ the problem on their own (Fodor andInoue, 2000) before planning their response (an OIR).
November 25, 2025 at 9:22 AM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
And Shaeffer and Maynard (2005) demo'd how phenomena often treated as indexing cognitive processing (like delays) can be better formulated interactionally.
Extract (3), shows another example of the respondent soliciting the interviewer’s help in answering the question. After verifying that ‘Certi- Cleaner’ is a janitorial service (lines 243–6), the interviewer reads question 25B-2 at lines 248–9. But she omits the category ‘manufacturing’, providing a possible example of how interviewers use information respondents have previously provided to modify question wording (Houtkoop, 1991/4). That is, the interviewer may have decided that a ‘janitorial service’ would not be considered ‘manufacturing’, and so does not read that category. Extract (3) [Interview 019c, Version C] 243 FR: Certi-Cleaner of Bigelow 244 (6.2) ((typing)) 245 IV: O:: kay:: and you said this was a (.) janitorial service? {q25B-1} 246 FR: Yes 247 (7.5) ((typing)) 248 IV: Ohhkay (uh:) would this be considered (.) retail trade 249 whole (.) tale (.) trade or something else. {q25B-2} 250 (3.5) 251 FR: Well (.) Like I say it’s just a janitoral service that 252 cleans (.) businesses 253 (0.5) 254 FR: [when they]’re closed 255 IV: [Uh Okay] 256 (3.0) 257 IV: O : : : : kay : : 258 (1.2) 259 IV: And let’s see what kinda work does he usually do at his 260 job .hh uh:: [(ju-)] {q25C} After the question reading, the respondent hesitates, producing a long silence (line 250). Previous research has treated response latency such as this as evidence that cognitive processing is taking place (see Bassili, 1996). The respondent’s next utterance (lines 251–4) is not formatted as an answer to the question. From a psychological perspective, this utterance might show that the respondent is having trouble understanding the point of the question and as such might display the respondent’s ‘uncertainty’. But this kind of answer can also be a deployment of ‘tentativeness’ as an interactive resource (Schaeffer and Maynard, 2002a; cf. Marlaire and Maynard, 1990), which is a characterization of how the participants themselves proceed. Rather than selecting from among the offered categories, the respondent marks her utterance as a repeat (‘Like I say’, line 251) of the type of business in which her son is engaged (‘janitorial service’, line 251), adds one descriptor (‘that cleans businesses’ lines 251–2) and then, after a brief pause (line 253), another (‘when they’re closed’).7 The respondent appears to be doing something akin to what Drew (1984) describes as ‘reporting’ in invitation sequences. Reporting is a way of providing details relevant to answering an invitation without stating an acceptance or rejection, and it allows a co-participant to determine the ‘upshot’ of the reporting. Analogously, the respondent here avoids answering the question with a category, but provides possibly relevant information the interviewer could use in selecting a proper category or deciding on the next question to ask. The three-second silence at line 256, the acknowledgement at line 257, the next silence at line 258, plus the interviewer’s proceeding to the next question (lines 259–60) all indicate that she does precisely this. That is, the silences, acknowledgement and moving on suggest that the interviewer herself has constructed a codable answer from the material provided by the respondent. In short, in a manner similar to that used by the respondent in extract (2), the respondent here solicits the interviewer’s help with answering, and the interviewer accedes to that solicitation. (See also the more detailed analysis in Schaeffer and Maynard, 2002a).
November 25, 2025 at 9:22 AM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
I thought about this a bit in relation to autistic children's "delays" responding to FPPs. Rendle-Short (2014) noted extended intraturn silences could be understood as reflecting extended processing time due to cognitive difficulty (as in cogpsych) but could also just reflect "desire to withdraw".
November 25, 2025 at 9:22 AM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
the government's extreme centralisation and regulation is having a wild effect on my brain, making it hard for me to distinguish between the structures in these two images:
a painting. the tower of babel by Lucas van Valckenborch in 1594 photograph of the Beehive, AoNZ government building.
November 24, 2025 at 11:24 PM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
i'm not sure why, but ZOBY tickles me so much. my mind automatically went to make it a replacement for how the costanza's exclaim things with "baby!"
picture of frank costanza from seinfeld screaming (as he was wont to do). The text in the lower quarter originally said "IM BACK BABY!" (a think frank shouted), but the "baby!" has been replaced with the 2034 part of the Utah olympics interim logo (because they look kinda similar, but also its said ZOBY).
November 24, 2025 at 11:18 PM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
Epstein and sexual selection sociobiology dingdong Robert Trivers talked about "trans-sexuality in humans". Wish I could see what prompted this but I'm glad to know that such an expert for decades only discovered cis women can be attracted to trans women in the year of our lady twenty eighteen.
i have thought through trans-sexuality in humans to my satisfaction—i will get back to you shortly on that all best one final anecdote on Trans met a very attractive 42 year old woman in New Orleans, married, 4 children, thoroughly heterosexual—no lesbian relationship—but she had a fantasy of being f—kid by a male -> female trans because she preferred a cock in her but also liked a female figure, hips, ass, soft skin etc—hadn't seen that anywhere on the internet! all best, in haste bob
November 21, 2025 at 10:07 PM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
Simone Weil, from The Need for Roots.
The contemplation of veritable works of art, and much more still that of the beauty of the world, and again much more that of the unrealized good to which we aspire, can sustain us in our efforts to think continually about that human order which should be the subject uppermost in our minds. The great instigators of violence have encouraged themselves with the thought of how blind, mechanical force is sovereign throughout the whole universe. By looking at the world with keener senses than theirs, we shall find a more powerful encouragement in the thought of how these innumerable blind forces are limited, made to balance one against the other, brought to form a united whole by something which we do not understand, but which we call beauty. If we keep ever-present in our minds the idea of a veritable human order, if we think of it as of something to which a total sacrifice is due should the need arise, we shall be in a similar position to that of a man travelling, without a guide, through the night, but continually thinking of the direction he wishes to follow. Such a traveller’s way is lit by a great hope.
November 21, 2025 at 11:11 AM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
I also recently picked up How To Be Queer (from Sarah Nooter; loving me some Sappho 🩷), and The Need for Roots (my first Simone Weil read after knowing of her for a while).
Picture of me holding up two books in front of me in one hand. The book on the left is "how to be queer" and on the right is "The need for roots"
November 20, 2025 at 9:53 PM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
Picked up Lloyd Geering's Resurrection-A Symbol of Hope from 1971.
The inside title page. The title of the book is the the top of the page, beneath that is the the name Lloyd geering. At the bottom of the page is the hodder and Stoughton logo.
November 20, 2025 at 5:14 AM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
I dragged mother to the movies to see The Running Man (coz we both like Stephen King, she's the one who got me into him). I enjoyed it. Fun action, bit heavy handed with the messaging. But most importantly, me and Maxie were a couple mega cuties 🥰🩷
Me holding maxie standing next to a poster for the film The Running Man.
November 16, 2025 at 2:05 AM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
I couldn't let this go. Snapped and melted down at my mother about the persisting consequences for me of her choices and unchoices and it was neither cathartic nor productive. She's aware of the horrors, but "you can't change the past". Nor the future, I guess *shrugs* it'll all be fine though 🩷
Screenshot from death stranding 2. Sam sitting in a room facing the camera doing a thumbs up gesture. The room is bathed in red light as a warning alert is displayed saying DANGER: HOSTILE PRESENCE DETECTED.
November 13, 2025 at 12:26 PM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
He goes goes on to talk about how participants often unknowingly pick up their interlocutors' frames/language and how therefore believing that people are controlling your mind can't be itself madness because it is in fact true. Sacks had the really good juice ❤️
(Sacks, 1995, Vol 2, pp. 399-401)
There are, then, some apparent virtues to spatializing. […] it does seem plain that […] one may find oneself collecting an enormous proportion of the characterizations present in a conversation, present in consistent ways, ways that seem to provide both problems and solutions. That is, a suicide problem getting formed up within a spatial format can perhaps give one the notion that what we want is to get out of this world and go somewhere else, and that that's an achievable thing, where lacking that spatial conception no such solution may be available. […] And furthermore, I at least suppose for now that nobody in the conversation at all notices this organization. I guess that, that I say it goes unnoticed has to do with that I'd imagine that if it were noticed anywhere it would begin to be picked up on, giggled over, treated as embarrassing, and various other things that people begin to do in a conversation when something is just happening in it, beyond their control, that neither of them figures either of them is responsible for. That is to say, as when they begin to see puns popping up in a conversation, or when they find themselves using some odd word again and again, they do things that bring it to each others' attention. Now, how something as prominent, as striking, as overwhelmingly present as that goes unnoticed is a question. And it isn't particularly obscure, nor do you need a very abstract view of things in order to find this. Now I'm wondering, is it possible that if someone does such a thing this much and the other does not notice it, that the other will not do it also? Supposing that one talks in such a way […] but supposing that one talks in that way and doesn't see it, and the other doesn't see it either, then is it not sort of inevitable that the other person nonetheless now begins to exhibit an attention to it in some way, i.e., begins themselves to form problems up, to characterize events in the way this Mr Smith ends up doing? In that regard, there's a kind of routine observation made about something that happens to people who are crazy, i.e., they get the idea that other people are controlling their minds. Now that came up as a topic when I was working on a piece of data that involved somebody saying "Remember that car you had?" It sounds like a question, and you could think of it as just a question. In some ways it's not that at all, it's a command which says "Remember that car you had.” And now you find that the car you had pops into your head, and you say "Yeah," not, however, "Yeah I was remembering the car," because the car wasn't on your mind at all. So if we wanted to know the sources for people having the view that others control their thoughts, then one kind of transparent thing is someone asking you if you remember something. The first thing you know is that you remember it; they're telling you what to do with your head. And it's imaginable that somebody could go through a conversation like this one and have a sense that the other took over their mind, i.e., the other person's spatial terminology has now become how you are thinking whatever you're thinking about, across a series of things you're thinking about, i.e., while topics change. And a thing we can come away with is that people aren't crazy for thinking that other people control their minds. That could not be a source of their craziness. That could only be a matter of wisdom. Now, people may well be differentially sensitive to it, and indeed those who feel it may only feel it and not know why it's so. Plainly we go through conversations like this figuring we were being spontaneous and our own person, when some immense amount of the things we say are cast by reference to a way that the other talked - that they didn't even know that they were using. But it is imaginable that somebody could feel queasy about it, feel that they're talking in a way that's not their way of talking. You feel that you are not yourself – maybe 'phoney,' maybe somehow something else. And what I'm wondering is whether if you had a tape of the conversation you might not find that in ways like this the other has taken over your mind. Of course it might have been educational - you might have found a different way of thinking about things you've thought about - but the thing is that you wouldn't in the first instance know what had happened. If you knew what had happened you might well have picked up on it, giggling over it or whatever. Again though, and as a further lesson for this, certainly it would be silly to take the complaints of crazy people too lightly. It's much more interesting to consider whether what they say is at all so, not how is it nonsense. And for a thing that's very dramatically present and has been much talked about – the notion that others control my mind, influence my thoughts, etc. - there are simple and transparent ways in which that's obviously so. And thereby, people could not be crazy for asserting it. Why they feel it and no one else does? That's another question. I'm saying that they're right. People do control their minds, and not theirs only. Now I'm not saying that they're right for the reasons they think they're right, but certainly one might explain a feeling in an incorrect way and nonetheless have the feeling right. You can't, after all, complain about things like "Remember that car you had?" You can't say "Oh, go to hell ." Nor can you not remember. It's a nice sort of power to consider.
November 7, 2025 at 6:50 AM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
oh drat we did it again 🙄
the seymour skinner "no its the children who are wrong" meme. The top text reads "is is phrenology, eugenics, and/or race science it I really just want to discern the true nature of any given individual and determine how best to put it towards my interests?" Bottom text reads "no, its the poors, browns, and mentally degenerate who are wrong"
November 6, 2025 at 11:10 PM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
Picture of David Lynch looking kinda melancholic. In white text is the subtitle "everything is dark" however the word dark is crudely scribbled out and replaced with text next to it so that it now reads "everything is really quite bright actually".
November 5, 2025 at 11:05 AM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
The team I work in is starting a weekly work-on-campus day and today is the first one and I have to be a grown-up human. Eeeep 😣 though it'll be nice to see people and also take advantage of printing a bunch of stuff I need to read.
Picture of me hiding my teddy bear maxie in front of me. We are on a train and have our back to the window out of which there are train tracks and trees. There is red text in the top left saying "trainssexuals dolly and Maxie off to workies".
November 4, 2025 at 8:05 PM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
Many signs in this articles. This one also caught me. "are you interested in 'just asking questions' and doing 'your own research' when 'THEY' are clearly trying to hide the truth from you? *wink wink nudge nudge*"
Bunce acknowledged there was no signage offering context, or information about wartime atrocities committed by the unit. He said he planned to add some. However, anyone wanting to know more would find "plenty of avenues open to people to further research this if they desire".
November 3, 2025 at 11:44 PM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
A black Icthys fish symbol
November 3, 2025 at 6:56 AM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
He legit literally is lol
Luxon bowed slightly forward with his eyes wide open and face forward towards trump who is holding his hand up as if pinching between his fingers a little treat.
November 3, 2025 at 6:29 AM
dollyeldritch.bsky.social
blehh cursed to stumble onto these pics on the white house website of NZ prime minister and friend-to-all-parties-in-genocide showing clux looking at der Führer like a puppy with anime heart-pupil eyes doing little tricks for treats from daddy. file these away for later.
screenshot of top of the page of a gallery on the US White House government website. The heading of the page is "President Donald Trump participates in a pull-aside meeting with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon of New Zealand". Below that are three photos. Each photo is of Luxon on the left and Trump on the right, both standing in front of US and NZ flags. In the first image Luxon is doing an odd pose laughing with his arms out to his sides looking right at the camera while Trump looks at him. The second picture is the two of them with the right hands in front of the doing a thumbs up gesture at the camera. The third Trump is hold his hand out in front of him with his fingers together as if holding somthing quite small while Luxon has his face toward with his eyes wide open.
November 3, 2025 at 4:38 AM