Eugenia Cooney: Does She Need Help? No. She Has Enough Help.

I am a fan of Eugenia Cooney, and I don’t think she needs any advice to seek medical treatment — she has no shortage of it; why add more?

Everyone and their cousin, who got their medical degrees from a crackerjack box, have advised Eugenia to seek medical treatment for everything under the sun, usually anorexia. Every instagram post she makes nowadays is often loaded down with “eat a hamburger” or “get treatment” kinds of advice.

She has plenty of people, who have a license to practice instagram medicine, telling her she needs help. What she does not need, for certain, is another such person to chime in with such advice.

At this point, as best as can be told, she’s fine. She states repeatedly on YouNow that she’s fine, and as far as I’m concerned, she fine. In fact, here is a ten-minute audio supercut I made of one of her YouNow broadcasts, in which she answers questions concerning her health. If you don’t think she’s fine, what are you going to do? Oh surely, she’ll listen to you. Because it’s your advice everyone’s been waiting on. How many people does it take, repeating the same tired, unoriginal, mantra to seek help, before someone seeks it — when there is not even a problem?

Here’s the breakdown of my position:
1. If there’s something really wrong, she doesn’t owe it to us to tell us, because your own health is your business and nobody else’s. There’s a reason medical records are sealed documents that require signature authorization to access — it’s private. If she wants to keep anything private, she’s not covering it up, because it’s supposed to be covered up. It’s none of our business. The uncovering of it is what is not supposed to happen — by law!

2. To say that she needs help, to me, is to assume that she does not have an untreatable condition. On the off-chance that she may have a terminal illness for which there is no help, and for which her appearance is normal within that context, reminding her to seek help could actually continually remind her of the help she could not actually get. If it’s genetic, then there’s not really much that could be done. Take for example another YouTuber named Lizzie Velasquez, who is a motivational speaker and anti-bullying activist who has had to defend herself for much of her life about her condition — a condition which inhibits accumulation of body mass.

For all we know, Eugenia may have something similar, or some other terminal condition for which there is no known treatment, and she could be living out her days pursuing her dream of being a YouTube star.. but those telling her to get help are getting lost in the mix of haters telling her to go eat a hamburger. Again, whether she wishes to tell us about any health condition, is up to her, but so far, she insists she’s fine, and that’s good enough for me. If there even is something, whatever. If there’s not something, whatever.

3. Calling her beautiful does not reinforce an eating disorder (if there even is one), because (a) she’s an adult and not some kid who doesn’t know any better, and (b) the words of the speaker mean what the speaker means. To say that calling her beautiful is harmful, is taking the side of the creeps who says the way a woman must surely be advertising the oldest profession by the way a woman dresses. Whether a woman wears a certain kind of shirt because she wants to show off her assets, or because it’s hot outside, is her interpretation alone to make. If you shout NO to an assailant, is the assailant allowed to interpret it how they wish? If no means no, then my “beautiful” is not harmful.

4. She does see doctors. Just before her trip to LA from the northeast, she had an injury to a finger and it was in a splint for a few videos. She goes to doctors. She does seek treatment for things. You know good and well that any doctor worth the TP their degree is printed on would have brought it up. Doctors take into context all kinds of bodily issues that could affect one small injury, and address those things in the treatment of the one thing you’re there to see them for. And if any those doctors fail her, surely she can turn to the teeming swarms of iPhone warriors ready to dish out a diagnosis. Maybe the reason she’s even in LA is because there is a specialist there.

Regardless of her reasoning, Eugenia owes it to zero persons to explain anything about her health. I’m a fan. If she suddenly swells up like Marjorie Dursley from Harry Potter and floats up into the sky, I’m still a fan. It’s who she is, how she handles adversity, her general spirit and approach to life that I find beautiful, and that’s what I mean by it. If she tells us later on that she did have an ED, then my words still mean the same thing. But as far as I’m concerned, if she says she’s fine, then she’s fine, and that’s all there is to it.

List of Short Poems from “Dear John And Hank” Podcast

I was looking for a particular poem (from ep.50) and couldn’t find an exhaustive list so I figured I’d make one myself, although to be honest I did glompf the first 29 from this tumblr post (and ‘sonetexas’ in the disqus comments is me).

Episode 01 : Langston Hughes – Quote/Poem
Episode 02: Ogden Nash – Everyone Tells Me Everything
Episode 03: Mary Oliver – I Go Down to the Shore
Episode 04: Walt Whitman – When I Heard the Learned Astronomer
Episode 05: Bernie Taupin – Tiny Dancer (Guest John: Maureen Johnson)
Episode 06: Bernie Taupin – Daniel (Guest John: Emma Blackery)
Episode 07: Bernie Taupin – Rocket Man (Guest John: Charlie & Jimmy)
Episode 08: Bernie Taupin – Levon (Guest John: Grace Helbig)
Episode 09: Bernie Taupin – Saturday Night’s Alright (Guest John: Felicia Day)
Episode 10: James Tate – Never Again the Same
Episode 11: AE Hausman – Here Dead We Lie
Episode 12: Emily Dickinson – Tell All the Truth, But Tell it Short
Episode 13: Margaret Atwood – You Fit into Me
Episode 14: William Wordsworth – The World is too Much With Us
Episode 15: William Carlos Williams – This is Just to Say
Episode 16: Kenneth Koch – Variation on a Theme by William Carlos Williams
Episode 17: George Bilgere – The Return of Odysseus
Episode 18: Raymond Carver – Grief
Episode 19: James Wright – Discoveries in Arizona
Episode 20: Philip Larkin – Home is so Sad
Episode 21: Seamus Heaney – The Skylight
Episode 22: EE Cummings – I Thank You God for Most This Amazing
Episode 23: John Keats – The Last Will and Testament of John Keats
Episode 24: Marianne Moore – Poetry
Episode 25: Dorothy Parker – Unfortunate Consequence
Episode 26: EE Cummings – O Sweet Spontaneous
Episode 27: George Herbert – Virtue
Episode 28: Emily Dickinson – 202
Episode 29: Wendy Cope – He Tells Here

Episode 30: Emily Dickinson – 314 Hope Is The Thing With Feathers
Episode 31: Sonia Sanchez – Black Magic
Episode 32: David Bowie – Eight Line Poem (lyrics)
Episode 33: Robert Burns – Epitaph on a Friend
Episode 34: WH Auden – Funeral Blues (Stop All The Clocks)
Episode 35: Claude McKay – If We Must Die
Episode 36: Mary Oliver – If You Are Holding This Book
Episode 37: Octavia Butler – quote from book “Parable of the Sower”
Episode 38: Nizar Qabbani – Light Is More Important Than The Lantern (Quote)
Episode 39: DH Lawrence – Tourists
Episode 40: Sara Teasdale – There Will Come Soft Rains
Episode 41: Richard Wright – Haiku 78
Episode 42: Richard Wright – Burning Out Its Time
Episode 43: Merle Haggard – Momma Tried (Lyrics of Chorus)
Episode 44: Frances Darwin Cornford – On Rupert Brooke
Episode 45: Emily Dickinson – 314 Hope Is The Thing With Feathers (again, yes)
Episode 46: Frances Darwin Cornford – The Guitarist Tunes Up
Episode 47: Emily Dickinson – There is No Frigate Like a Book
Episode 48: Anonymous Listener – The Daffodil Knows More of Spring
Episode 49: Langston Hughes – “Poem” (..I loved my friend..)
Episode 50: Elinor Wylie – Now Let No Charitable Hope
Episode 51: Richard Wright – You Moths Must Leave Now
Episode 52: Muhammad Ali – Float Like a Butterfly
Episode 53: Leon Muss – People Often Ask Me
Episode 54: Edna St. Vincent Millay – Not So Far as the Forest
Episode 55: Adam Zagajewski – Try To Praise The Mutilated World
Episode 56: none?
Episode 57: John Green – There Will Always Be Starburst
Episode 58: Flula – Sandwich
Episode 59: John Green / Hank Green (Rick Springfield + US Mint corrections)
Episode 60: Listener Andrew – Pokemon Go corrections
Episode 61: John Green – Six Light Minutes (Rover birthday correction)

Given that there will be undoubtedly more episodes, I will try to update it but if you know of any additional, please add in comments and I’ll amend =)

How To Destroy Rape Culture: Step 2: Feelings Made

Blogger Scary Mommy recently posted about a side-by-side comparison of the covers of Girls’ Life and Boys’ Life, leading with this nonsense:

We’ve got a very serious problem here. Hell, we’ve had a serious problem here for a long time. And it’s what we’re telling our girls. Girls only care about fashion and getting boys to like them. Or some version of that.

Later:

Their worth is determined by their bodies, what clothes and shoes they wear and what boys think of them. Girls are encouraged to do well in school, but not to worry about having a serious career. … What in the actual hell are we teaching our girls?

What you are teaching your daughters and sons is what you intend to teach your daughters and sons, not what they pick up on.

The message received is not the message being taught, so you cannot be “teaching” something against your will. If you believe that, then you are establishing the environment in which rape culture thrives.

If “how you made me feel” and “well, that’s how I feel after what you just said,” is what rules at the end of the day, then so also must, “Well, she made me feel like I should do it to her” be a valid conclusion. “She made me feel like I should do it to her,” is NOT a valid conclusion — in the SAME WAY that “that’s how you made me feel, after what you just said,” ALSO isn’t valid. If you believe these two to be unequal comparisons, then you have stumbled upon that which you must sacrifice in order to end rape culture, and how unwilling you actually are to go through with it.

The only message that is allowed, is the actual intended message, and that’s it. Period.

If ‘stop” means an assailant must halt their actions, then “calm down” means the angered must halt their anger.

Failing to obey “calm down” is the failure of someone to obey “stop.”

Justifying becoming more angry when told to calm down, justifies failing to stop when told to stop.

If no means no, and yes means yes — then no can’t be interpreted as yes, and yes can’t be interpreted as no.

If how a girl dresses DOES NOT mean she wants it, then “what I teach my daughter” is what you INTEND to teach her, not the message she picks up on.

If the way someone walks DOES NOT mean they’re advertising, then you cannot mistakenly teach your daughter or your son something — your son or daughter can FALSELY believe something based on a perceived context (in the SAME way that the onlooker believing someone is advertising is a false context). If the source that does not say it, it does not teach it. The fault of the flawed message is with the recipient, not the teacher, if the teacher did not intend it that way.

In the same way that it is the responsibility of the assailant to ensure consent is actually given, it is the responsibility of the feeler to ensure their feelings match the intention of the person who made the statement.

If you’re saying that “My reaction is based on how I felt, and you’re to blame,” then you’re saying that it is the interpreter who has the power, and you’re GIVING UP power to the interpreter, when it is the sole authority of the speaker to properly and authoritatively interpret their own message.

If you are teaching that it is the listener of the message whose false reaction is what the message really is, then you’re giving the power over to assailants to misinterpret as they wish.

“Can we do it?”
“No.”
“Good, take off your clothes.”
“But I said no.”
“But the way that you said no, tells me yes.”
“But I am saying to you, no, we cannot do it.”
“You’re saying no, but you’re making me feel yes.”

How the assailant feels doesn’t matter. What the consenting party’s actual message is, is what matters. The person from whom consent hinges, is the authority of whether the event takes place. The event is the lesson being learned. The idea that “our sons and daughters learn these lessons” without you having taught them, gives them the power, not you. By giving power to the interpreter over the message, then the consenting party is giving power to the assailant whether their no means yes.

“Are you saying I’m limited to only these occupations?
“No; you can have any occupation you wish.”
“But the magazine you bought me seems like I can only have these occupations.”
“No, it doesn’t; I am saying to you, you can have any you wish.”
“You’re saying I can, but this magazine makes me feel like I can’t.”

Compare this conversation with the previous.

How the interpreter of your message feels about your message is irrelevant: what is relevant is what the message is, and the fact that you define what your own message is. It is the responsibility of the interpreter to accurately interpret the message as the speaker intended, or better research the speaker’s message to ensure their feelings correspond with the feelings of the speaker.

If the speaker’s message can be credibly interpreted the way the interpreter desires, then the speaker’s yes or no doesn’t matter. Every time you continue to feel shamed, or continue to feel hurt, or continue to feel angered by someone’s message that was not intended to do so, you are placing importance upon your feelings AGAINST what the person’s actual message is. You’re choosing to dwell on YOUR interpretation, instead of the speaker’s ACTUAL message. That policy is what establishes rape culture: that the assailant’s feelings matter more than the consenter’s message. The interpreter is the assailant, and the speaker is the consenter.

If you’re going to say that the interpreter has power over the message, then you are fertilizing the ground for rape culture to grow.

If you say that the speaker is the sole authority of the message, and that the interpreter has no say in the nature of the speaker’s message, then you uproot the environment upon which rape culture thrives.

The solution is to be a student of the speaker’s message, and stop giving credit to “feelings” about a speaker’s message without the consent of the speaker, and encouraging others to likewise be students of each others’ words. Explore what the speaker’s message BEFORE reacting. Halt the tendency to knee-jerk react, and INVESTIGATE with additional questions, having made no decision on HOW to feel YET.

If someone does not intended offense, and you are offended, then you are offended by that which the speaker did not even say — you are offended by your own interpretation of the speaker’s message and have not halted your decision to react yet, and are relying on your own reaction to justify the offensiveness of the speaker’s statement. This policy is the fertilized ground upon which rape culture grows exceptionally well — that the feelings about the message are what matters, that the boy feeling like she wants it makes it okay. If the boy’s feeling is not what matters, then neither do yours.

Insisting that your feelings override what the message really is, despite the speaker’s objection to how you reacted despite their intention, is precisely the permission given to the assailant to assault.

The solution is to promote the halting of the reaction until research can be conducted. The solution is to investigate first, before reacting. The solution is to change your feelings, when presented with evidence that contradicts your feelings. If you are helpless in the battle to alter your feelings, by what authority do you expect assailants to change theirs when confronted with that which they believe you to be advertising? If a speaker’s, “that’s not what I meant, calm down,” does not calm you down, how do you expect, “Stop, I am saying to stop,” to carry any weight? By having the policy that failing to calm down is reasonable when told to calm down, then you must also simultaneously agree that an assailant failing to stop is also reasonable.

If you do not agree, then your pursuit to destroy rape culture without understanding it, is that which most enables it. If what I suggest sounds too complicated or convoluted, then you are beginning to understand the complexity of the world you have so drastically oversimplified.

List of Fakes News Sites That Only Jerkfaces Believe Are Real

If you get upset, sad, angry, etc, from reading news articles that come from these sources:

AmericanNews.com
DailyCurrant.com
BabylonBee.com
TheOnion.com
NationalReport.net
WorldNewsDailyReport.com
Celebriticity.com

..then you are a certified crackhead jerkface suckerbaby, and are ranked among the worst buffoons of mankind. If you share these just to troll other people, then you’re just a scruffy-looking nerfherder and you already know that.

All of those are fake news sites that do not print real stories. Some of them may be based loosely on realistic-seeming events, but they’re still fake.

You sharing them like they’re real, or you adding how disgusted you are as a comment under another buffoon’s share of it, merely reveals your secret buffoon identity.

This is not a complete list. Check to see whether it is actually not a fake news site first, before you share it. If you did share one of these sites thinking it was real, then go back to where you shared it to and remove the post — don’t just leave it up. Don’t be a crackhead.

If you find another site like these, add it below so we can tell all those jerkfaces out there to stop being such suckerbabies. (try replacing the . with a space, such as “name com” to avoid getting filtered by the spam-prevention)..

The Singlemost Important Obstruction to World Peace: Failure to Grasp Three-Plus Identity

I’ve always wanted to write a book title something like ‘the nature of the world according to ablestmage’ and along that facetious vein, I’ve decided to come up with the master list of personal habits each person should personally strive for, toward world peace. These things should not be legislated or required — but rather, each person on their own ought to strive for them, at their own pace.

1. Understand the Three-Plus concept of identity. I believe failure to grasp this concept is the most important obstruction to world peace.

Three-Plus is a concept of identity I have formulated to describe the number of identities each individual has. Each of the Three-Plus are distinct identities, different from each other and understood by varying sources. Each identity within the Three-Plus always exists, and there is no individual who has less than three, ever.

(a) the first identity is the true identity, which is a mystery to everyone else including the individual.

The true identity is the actual number of hairs on one’s body, the actual number of teeth, the actual genetic sequences, etc, at any given moment. The true identity always stays true and is never false, because it is made up of all of the actual details about a person, and may change moment to moment such as “current actual pulse rate” or “current volume of air in the lungs” that could be accurately measured if the technology existed to assist in the awareness of it.

If it were possible to view a data stream of all completely true aspects of a person, every entry would fluctuate (some more entries more rapidly than other entries) depending on things like the actual number of hairs on a person’s body, the actual length of every hair according to all degrees of measurement, the speed of each molecule and cell in the body relative to everything other molecule or cell elsewhere in the universe, etc.

The first identity is a mystery, because it is impossible for the individual to grasp all of these elements of themselves simultaneously.

(b) the second identity is the individual person’s best guess of their own first identity.

The second identity is always cumulatively false, although it may be scattered with numerous true aspects. Each person has a general understanding of “who I am” in regard to themselves. For instance, they may believe, “my ankle hurts when I run,” or, “I remember all of the lyrics to We Built This City,” or, “I have romantic feelings toward Danielle,” and each of those aspects about themselves make up the overall second identity.

Also, that overall second identity is always incomplete, because of the implausibility of fully realizing every element fully, simultaneously. As one grows older, a greater number of variable of oneself may become more fully realized, and the impression of oneself may alter to account for new variables experienced later that provides better inside to the impression of oneself, but it will always remain incomplete with always more to discover about oneself.

Also, the greatest authority over who knows best, or who has the “best total guess” of the true identity of someone is that person themself, who has had the most direct experience with theirself than anyone else. Only the individual can alter the second identity.

(c) the third identity is an external impression of the individual by a different individual.

Perhaps more importantly, the number of third identities that exist are multiplied by one or more, for every other individual who has ever or will ever exist. If someone named Urgu from 404 BC/E at any point wondered about the future of all people who would ever exist, then every person in the future would add “Urgu’s musings about me” to the list of their third identities. If Jamal from down the street thinks Tamira from apartment 404 is cute, then “Jamal’s musings about Tamira” is a third-identity of Tamira.

Also, the authority of the actual understanding of the third identity rests exclusively with the other person and cannot be changed by the person the identity is about. The person the identity is about might be able to influence change of that impression, but the decision to alter the impression rests exclusively with person making the external impression.

Also, the third identity is always cumulatively less accurate than the second identity, because the third identity can only have an outsider’s understanding of the person and never direct experience AS the person.

Notes/Discussion:

>>The second identity will absolutely not and can never even possibly be governed by a third identity.

If there is a suspicion that the second identity is influenced by the third, then the person misunderstands the concept of the second.

You decide how you think. If you take others’ thinking about you into consideration to influence your impression of yourself, you are still the sole and entire authority to decide whether to find that impression valid or invalid.

If you dismiss a third identity’s impression of you, then it is by your authority that it was dismissed, and therefore a matter of the second identity only.

If you accept a third identity impression of you, then it is by your authority that it is accepted, and therefore a second identity matter only.

Your understanding of yourself is yours to make, regardless of whether the information of that impression comes from direct experience or others’ assertions.

>> It is fully possible for the third identity to grasp something that the second does not or may never grasp. For instance, a baby who dies may have never grasped the concept of what hair is, but a third identity can observe whether the baby had any hair.

>> The first identity is the most credible, because all of it is always true and is not influenced by bias. If a datum is possible to be influenced by bias, then it is not an aspect of the first identity. The first identity can contain, however, the unbiased actuality of the biased datum.

>> The first identity is made up of every possible datum about the individual, including the curvature of every angle of every blood cell’s surface; the quantity of waste of every cell in the body and what that waste is composed of and broken down by quantity each; the volume of molecular absorption of each pore of a person’s skin, including how many of which molecule of which substance has been absorbed thereby, as well as the width, depth, curvature, circumference, relative angle, or bacterial contents of each pore; the actual number of neurons in the individual brains, including firing frequency, firing tendency, efficacy of the neuron for its intended purpose, strength of the neuron’s connection to other neurons, efficacy of re-transmitting the identical data through it compared to other neurons; even down to things like how many unique alphanumeric characters the individual has ever typed in the individuals lifetime, what liquid volume of tears shed about losing a loved one, how many times the person has blinked, how many traumatic experiences an individual has endured before a certain age and whether those events were actually traumatic to the individual or actually just imagined implications had the event transpired differently, among others.

>> The first identity also includes the actual number and accuracy of the second person and third person data points made about others, and no datum can be crowded out by any other datum of itself.

>> The second identity is not very credible. Although it is is the best non-first identity at being able to most-credibly describe one’s own first identity to another, it will always be cumulatively inaccurate because (a) it cannot grasp all aspects of itself simultaneously.

>> The third identity is the very least credible and least-even-potentially-credible impression of someone else, because (a) it does not involve (and can’t) actually having experienced that person within that person’s body; (b) of how much data/focus is required to even grasp the third identity’s offerer’s own second identity; and (c) how much data/focus is required to grasp all of the other third identities the third identity’s offerer’s offer about all other individuals.

>> Killing someone for any reason is the highest possible crime to identity, because it discards actual methodical investigation of someone’s identity and always prefers the least credible third-identity view of a person as the foundation for the action. Also, it artificially halts the the liberty of the person to maintain and explore their own second identity, and also renders most of the data points of the first identity to static positions and therefore unexplorable by third identities.

I believe that if this Three-Plus concept of identity could be grasped by all persons, then world peace would be possible.

Interpretation of Taeyeon WHY and Starlight MV Meaning

Taeyeon’s new MVs Starlight and WHY seem to be telling a story, but the narrative isn’t really very clear yet. Here’s my guesses about what the story might be — and these are just my guesses.

If you need a refresher, here are the two music videos in order they were released.

Starlight MV

WHY MV

1. I think it’s pretty clear that Dean and Taeyeon’s characters are ‘together’ romantically, probably in the first stages of the mutual crush since the lyrics of Starlight seem (to me) to describe only the beginning of their relationship where the squishy teddy-bear feelings are overwhelming, where everything else that was ordinary before seems like it can be viewed in a new way.

2. According to the lyrics, Taeyeon was “used to being alone” and I believe what the song is about is her encounter with “love” itself, not specifically Dean. The reason I think Dean isn’t the starlight she mentions, is because of the memorial site and what she does there. A lot of people seem to think it is Dean’s memorial, but I don’t think so. Bear with me here.

3. Taeyeon receives a message from a mysterious M74 on her pink pager device, and speaks on the phone to M74 while Dean is standing next to her. The message she receives is bad news. M74 is probably someone who lives nearby the memorial that has been set up for the former love or others that might have known the former love, such as a nurse who found the old love’s contact info and notified her of the death. In America, nurses and doctors often use pagers.

4. Taeyeon and Dean date for a little while, all the while that Taeyeon is thinking about M74’s pager message and phone conversation in the back of her mind because of some scenes where Taeyeon is alone after meeting Dean, as if she is still thinking about something else, but still happy at the same time. I think she is remembering what it was like to have the starlight feeling again in her life, and how refreshing it is.

5. At the end of the Starlight MV, Taeyeon seems to express visually that “wait for me, I need to do something” and then gradually leaves, but only for this errand. She’s not breaking up with him, she’s just running an errand that involves M74. If you notice at the end of Starlight and the beginning of Why, Taeyeon is shown walking with the same kind of stride, as if Why is continuing the story.

6. In the Why MV, we discover that M74 is a location according to a street sign. I am guessing M74 is the approximate location where the memorial is placed. In America, the kind of memorial on the ground is very common for people who have died in a car accident. The memorial is not where they are buried, but serves as a marker for where the memorialized person actually lost their life, and people who knew the person from the area they died can visit that spot without having to travel to the place they are actually buried in case it is far away.

7. Taeyeon leaves photographs of herself and Dean together as a sign to the dead love that she has moved on and found another starlight. In American cemeteries, if you see a little rock or a small pebble sitting on someone’s tombstone, that is a sign that a loved one who was mourning for the person who died believes their mourning period is over and they are ready to move forward, as a kind of closure. Not that they’ll never miss them again, but that they’re finally at a point where they have realized the loss will not be undone, and they have decided to move forward in their life without them. I think the photographs Taeyeon leaves at the memorial is like the little stone.

8. The lyrics of Why seem (to me) to suggest that Taeyeon has put off saying an official goodbye to the old love for too long, and needs to finally say it, so she can move on.

9. She was nervous about ever having to say goodbye forever, and she tries several different things while she’s on her way there to avoid doing it. The swings, the bubbles, the reading, skateboarding, the dock, are all just distractions from actually saying goodbye, but once she has finally said goodbye to the old starlight, it she wondered why it could have been as hard as she thought it would be — because now she realizes, with Dean, there are other starlights out there.

10. I don’t believe this is Dean’s memorial because Taeyeon doesn’t seem sad about it at all, as if she still has Dean to go back to, and how Dean is the new starlight. The scenes where Taeyeon jumps into the pool is like her uncertainty about “the jump” of saying goodbye forever, but actually feels refreshed once she does it. When she turns around after leaving the memorial, she doesn’t look sad, but optimistic for the future especially one that includes Dean.

11. I think the combination-lock message is from Dean, who gave it to her before she left. The unlocked message repeats what the original pager message said, as if Dean wants to remind her “Please remember me, too” in her quest to settle ties with the old love. The combination on the lock is “apple” and the nickname for New York (from the back Dean’s jacket when they bump into each other) is also called The Big Apple. The pink of the message paper also matches the pink of the building Dean and Taeyeon were standing next to when she got the original message, so since she received “miss me” from M74 originally and went to that location, she now receives “miss me” from Dean in the combination lock and will go back to him now.