all gone! ALRIGHT FOLK WHO WANTS NEOPRENE WRIST/HAND SPLINTS

Acquired surplus-to-requirements from someone who thought I'd have an easier time getting rid of them than she would.

And in fact I've discovered one of them works quite well for me, i.e. is the least irritating overnight splint I've found so far and I'm currently under active medical advice to actively splint overnight because of the now-confirmed-trigger-finger, SO, free to a good home, I'll cover postage (probably internationally, though honestly it would probably be more cost-effective for me to just give you the money to buy some locally), you're gonna hafta wait for me to actually get to a post office:

1. one set of black neoprene wrist splints; metal insert, velcro fastening
   
2. one set of pink-and-black neoprene thumb/wrist wraparound splints, velcro fastening, no metal insert

Both approx a size small (they fit me) but I will happily measure up if you'd like me to give you more details. Actually managing photos will be trickier but if you don't mind giving me a run-up I can manage it.

Desire and negotiation

A model of social interaction I am chewing over: the trade-off between the background assumption that "well, you're a right-thinking person and we agree on a lot so clearly you'll want what I want" and explicitly-negotiated compromise.

Humans are good at pattern-matching, and we're social animals, and we're prone to forming in-groups based on shared characteristics, and it is actually useful to be able to shorthand shared desire (from "pizza for dinner" to "political whatever", because I am very aware that social situations where "I'd rather not have pizza for dinner" cause major friction and insult are not Unheard Of).

It occurs to me, then, that a lot of the ways in which social interactions have blown up in my face might be usefully modelled as a mismatch of expectations as to how the balance gets struck.

From my perspective, I have a long-term relationship with someone wherein for some time it is the case that I am happy to compromise toward prioritising their needs, because I think that position of compromise costs me-and-therefore-us less than it would cost them; I tend toward the background assumption that when that shifts, when that compromise would cost me, when I end up needing something, they'll be similarly willing to accommodate me.

From their perspective, it seems probable that I've spent a long time being right-thinking and in-group and having wants that align with theirs, and when that's abruptly and inexplicably no longer the case I get shifted to out-group, or to unpredictable threat -- and that's not helped by my utter bafflement and own threat-response at how badly they're reacting to me wanting something that's in conflict with their desires.

Negotiation versus alignment, versus mirroring.

There's a framing in which this is "allistics are sometimes weirdly bad at recognising that not everyone they consider a good person wants what they want all the time in all circumstances"; in which recognising that fallacy and actively and explicitly negotiating instead is a skillset I've learned through negotiating with myself, my own present-versus-future wants, the way BPD affects my timescales of desire and means that it is painfully obviously in my best interests (and the best interests of those around me) for me to examine what I think I want, and why, and make sure I'm comfortable I'm making ethical choices in seeking comfort.

There's another framing -- and please admire the fact that I pay a trained professional £40/hour to access these insights, and that's very much sliding-scale rates -- in which, just maybe, how much space I make for people to want things that aren't what I want... is related to my incredible resistance to the idea, my reluctance to believe, that actually, sometimes, other people's desires do align with mine, even if I express mine first, and that doesn't mean that other-desire is coerced or insincere.