some sort of wetland creature

Call me Ace. It/he/any. One of many. 27 — eng/中文/יידיש — Circus performer (aerial, acrobatics, whatever else calls to me). Fallen london stuff @ letheology, video games @ wei-ning

[renumuro]

The Felidae

[lake-erie]

this year’s prom theme is… *opens envelope* Great Lakes Invasive Species And What Boaters Can Do To Stop Them

[football-in-tuxedos]

And the subject of tonight’s ecology panel is *turns on powerpoint* Enchantment Under the Sea

[spaceshipsandpurpledrank]

TLDR: this white queer person tried to hold other white queer people accountable for their racism and they DID NOT LIKE THAT

[b33viemm]

[ Video transcript: two tiktoks by daniyalisbae (daniyal is bae) of them close up to/talking to their phone camera.

First part is them staring at the camera in exasperation. Caption says: "white transmascs appropriating black culture after transitioning because they associate blackness with masculinity." Theres music playing and they mouth along the words "that is not the baby!"

Second part is a response to the first. Slow piano music plays in the background. Caption says: "white queers have a weaponized incompetence problem."

The filmer says the following:

"The other day, I made a video talking about how white transmascs appropriate black culture in order to feel more masculine because they associate blackness with masculinity. And never before in my life, or posting videos about trans discourse, have I gotten so many comment from people acting completely oblivious or confused to the issue, even though the issue is a very simple statement.

I think this reflects the fact that a lot of white queer people are just incapable of thinking about issues if it is not personally affecting them.

And I think this reveals a weaponized incompetence issue in the larger white queer community when it comes to racial issues. When someone brings attention to intercommunal issues not about race, I never get these comments. I never get comments acting confused, or acting like what im talking about is so incomprehensible, or saying things like, 'well, I've never seen this happen,' because people accept 'maybe this has happened, just not to me.'

But the second someone brings up a racial issues, suddenly it's incredibly confusing and complex, and people need to explain to them five million different ways to where they get it. And obviously other people call bullshit to this, and they say, 'This is very clearly just you refusing to understand this, not you being unable to understand.'

And a lot of people in the comment seem to be resorting to the fact they theyre neuro divergent to excuse the fact that theyre not aware of racial dynamics in the queer community. And I think this is a larger problem. People like to flee into marginalized identity and talk about how theyre queer, or theyre neurodivergent, in order to get away from complex critiques about the way they ignore racism in their own community.

There are two possibilities. Either 1: these people are aware of this issue, and are pretending not to know about it because it allows them to escape accountability; or 2: theyre just generally not aware of it. But both of these things reveal a problem, because it means that white queer people either do not notice, or do not care, about the racism happening in their own community. Because the problem identified is not a niche issue, it happens all the time. But the refusal to use critical thinking —or even just look in the comments for other explanations, before jumping to acting confused and acting ignorant of the issue— is a bigger problem that white queer people need to examine in themselves.

Remaining ignorant on issues of race and acting like you've never seen this happen, or you've never heard this before, is a result of you ignoring it, not as a result of it not happening.

The fact that tons of people in the comments who are Black queer people are saying this happens all the time, but white queer people are saying they've never seen it happen, suggests that it's not that it doesn't happen, its that white queer people dont recognize it happening because they dont actually pay attention to racial issues in their community. Which is why when it gets called out, they act so confused about it.

End video transcript.]

@rjalker

[good-advice-ganondorf]

[transmascmarypoppins]

why is this post completely broken in every way imaginable

[cecilsrandomeverything]

Broken notes… deactivated account… removed image….

Finally, we have them all.

[spacefinch]

In addition: OP’s name is just… gone. No “[insert username]-deactivated[insert a bunch of numbers]” as is the standard for deactivated blogs.

Just the world “deactivated.” Look upon their post, ye mighty, and despair.

[chatblancofficial]

It’ll be almost impossible to find this post unless it wanders across your dash.

[huewrite]

It wandered across mine. I shall help it travel forward.

[gossamermouse]

this is not a place of honor

[jackviator]

[dinosaurana]

Oh hey post of Ozymandius, good to see you again standing on your feet in a desert where no one remembers you

[official-linguistics-post]

uh oh

"etymologynerd" is at it again and this time i do feel i have to say something. the disability advocates have it covered on addressing the impact, but there's also a serious problem with the linguistics.

in a video shared on may 16, adam aleksic begins by saying: "i think we have to accept the fact that the 'r-word' [retard/retarded] is permanently coming back and it's functionally changed meanings to no longer directly refer to disabled people."

this first sentence alone betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of language change in several points.

this word never went away. what we're seeing now is an attempt at re-normalization by people who sense that they will not be socially punished by openly using this term.

we actually don't have to "accept" its return to mainstream use. for decades, disability advocates have worked to inform the public of the harm caused by casual use of this term. the harm has not disappeared, and neither will this advocacy and its impacts.

now i'm just mad. how tf does it NOT refer to disabled people? the entire point of a pejorative term is that it negatively invokes comparison to a person, group, etc. the assertion that the r-word has changed meanings is categorically false. at most, its primary context has changed from clinical to casually pejorative, but the insult fundamentally rests upon the original reference.

he goes on to refer to the "euphemism treadmill," another concept he misrepresents by extending the metaphor to say that terms which have been sufficiently distanced from their original reference are no longer pejorative. to quote: "...once we sufficiently distance a word from its historical usage, it stops taking on the same offensive power and just becomes colloquial instead."

which... what? what the fuck is he talking about? the words he uses as examples – idiot, imbecile, and moron – are definitely still offensive, if perhaps less impactful. "just becomes colloquial instead" is a nonsense phrase. are offensive words not colloquial? the only english word that comes to mind as having changed so much in definition as to no longer be offensive is "nice," which has been shifting in meaning for more than 700 years and was never a weaponized clinical term.

he ends by saying, "it is undeniably true that the people who are afraid to say the r-word right now are going to get old and die out, while younger generations keep saying it with no knowledge of where it came from." again, fundamentally misunderstanding language change in society over time. it rests on the assumption that we're all going to start or re-start using this slur and never have a conversation about its harms, which just completely ignores both the abovementioned disability advocacy and the fact that people tell each other not to use offensive words. you think i'm just not gonna teach my kids that using slurs is bad??

the whole video is devoid of both empathy and an understanding of long-term semantic change.

tl;dr etymologynerd is wrong, we do NOT "have to accept that the 'r-word' is coming back," and we all need to read more crip linguistics.

[spooniestrong]

Remember: being in pain uses energy. There’s nothing wrong with taking a long nap or sleeping in late after being in pain all day. If you need to rest, do it; don't let anyone try to convince you otherwise.

Listen to your body and its needs.

[skygenders]

There is something sooo deeply American going on with Seattle Children’s Hospital that I think would brick the minds of everyone outside of the United States.

[skygenders]

The CHILDRENS hospital has to restrict helipad landings because of noise complaints from the wealthy home owners living next to it. Only the most urgent patients can land directly at the hospital. While the other kids have to land a mile away and are taken to the hospital via ambulance. Which is an unnecessary risk to the child’s life and also makes the families pay for the helicopter AND ambulance.

[skygenders]

Seattle Children’s says Laurelhurst noise concerns burdens lifesaving care for children

The hospital says some limits on helipad access add pressure when children need lifesaving care.

Apparently this has been going on for decades and is only getting traction because a pilot complained on Twitter.

[bigskycastle]

barn owl

[beaft]

i am not a psychiatrist but i do find it really weird how autism checklists are so often focused on "outward" signs of autism rather than what is going on internally. i don't know how to explain it but "do you make eye contact with other people" feels like a much less relevant question than "how does it feel when you have to make eye contact with other people?"

[beaft]

while i'm here, the other one that always pisses me off is "do you interpret idioms literally, for example 'bull in a china shop'?"

well, no, obviously. i know what "bull in a china shop" means because that is a popular phrase with a clearly defined meaning. and if i hadn't heard it before, then i would still not interpret it literally, because it has the cadence of an idiom and i would probably be able to work out from context what it meant. what is the point of this question

[beaft]

third and final complaint: "are you good at noticing subtext?"

i feel like the problem with this question is best illustrated by a conversation i had with a friend a while back, where i said something like, "i feel very safe with you because you don't do subtle hints and you are always very straight-up with me about what you are thinking and feeling."

and he laid a hand on my shoulder and was like, look dude i'm gonna be straight up here. i am subtle with you constantly and you simply do not notice <3

[beaft]

@luckyybones hope you don't mind me screenshotting but you are actually so correct

[sometiktoksarevalid]

[thedreamthieves]

i think one of the worst things the left wing internet ever did was push the idea that oppression is basically a virtue, and being oppressed is a sign of your morality. it has made it like…impossible for some of you to hold the idea that most people are privileged in some ways and oppressed in others. AND a lot of you seem to have it in your mind that terrible people cannot be oppressed, and that oppressed people cannot do terrible things, which is a dangerous rhetoric to hold imo.

[cardassiangoodreads]

Not only is it important so you don't get taken advantage of by terrible people wielding their oppressions as weapons, but also your convictions against oppression should not be contingent on the morality of the people suffering. Shitty people don't deserve to be oppressed either. Human rights are one of those things you only really understand and believe in if you see them as universal, not conditional.

[northshorewave]

Handing the Google executive currently chained in my basement a piece of paper that reads "Shall I end your torture?" with one checkbox that reads "No" and another that reads "Maybe later."

[prokopetz]

Level 1: Asylums are scary because there's crazy people there.

Level 2: We shouldn't treat mental health facilities as objects of horror because it stigmatises mental illness.

Level 3: Asylums are scary because there's psychiatrists there.

[cloudabserk]

WARNING do NOT start reading books and comics or watching movies or looking at art!!! you will start wanting to create art yourself. or god forbid. writing.

[cambriancrew]

[thecryptkeeper]

i know the way people talk about their pets now is probably how we’ve been doing it for all of history. a cat owner in ancient rome saw their cat lounging on the dining pillows and commented “he thinks himself to be the senator claudius 🤣”

[orthoscheme]

supermarkets should have benches

[orthoscheme]

everywhere should have benches