rb to tell ur mutuals ur fond of them

Product Placement
Doug Jones
Interview Vampire Daily
Today's Document

PR's Tumblrdome
No title available

pixel skylines
ojovivo
almost home
No title available

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
Sade Olutola

Jimmy Eat World
untitled
Cosimo Galluzzi
Cookie Run:Kingdom Official!
No title available

blake kathryn
Color Me Curious
Game of Thrones Daily

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Brazil
seen from Türkiye

seen from Ukraine

seen from Malaysia
seen from Uzbekistan
seen from Argentina
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from China
seen from Bangladesh
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from Colombia
seen from Venezuela
seen from Philippines

seen from Philippines
seen from Colombia
seen from Morocco
@comfortmediarambles
rb to tell ur mutuals ur fond of them
Imo the best type of system for children to grow up in would be one that assumes the birth parents/primary guardians won't do shit and takes care of every aspect of childcare that's essential for their wellbeing and development, collectively.
But I'm just a guy who only learned how to brush his teeth properly and got glasses as a child because we had both a dentist and a doctor come to school on a regular basis. The dentist would have us all stand in a circle with our little toothbrushes and show us how to brush and correct our technique. The doctors would give us general health assessments and then have the teachers contact our patents and essentially peer pressure them into getting us any health intervention we needed. My parents only reluctantly got me glasses because they knew the teachers would judge them if they kept seeing me sit in the very front row and still squint to see the chalkboard. So I'm biased.
The only times I ever remember seeing a dentist or doctor as a child was at school. I'm quite healthy physically and I'm very grateful for all the care I got from the various professionals who cared about my well-being and development more than my actual parents did.
We had free healthcare including dental, mind you, my parents just couldn't be bothered. When my brother, as a teenager, asked our mother if she could take him to his orthodontist appointments (which he'd already arranged for on his own) she basically told him she didn't feel like it and he had to take the bus.
If I could improve anything about that system, I'd take it even further and make it so kids could see a doctor and get meds, treatments, therapy, tests, disability aids etc. without having to rely on their parents as well. I shouldn't have had to put up with being bullied and guilt-tripped about the family finances and the time investment needed to take me to the optometrist every time I needed new glasses.
Some parents would not take care of their children even if they were given all the time and the resources. Mine are a great example of that — my mother stopped working and became a homemaker when I was in kindergarten, my father worked from the garage and was also always home. They had a car and our village even had a bus that would come once or twice an hour that would take you to the next two bigger cities.
Did that, plus the free healthcare, translate into them actually parenting and caring for us properly? It did not. They only ever did any of that reluctantly when not doing it would make them look bad, and most of the time they did a shitty job because they could never resist the urge to boost their egos by means of bullying literal children.
So I have to wonder: what did they actually contribute to our upbringing? Like they didn't teach us shit and mostly they just endangered our mental and physical health — but hey, at least they gave me cPTSD! That took some work too.
see also family abolition, and youth liberation .
A knee-jerk response to neglectful parenting I see a lot is “people should have to get licenses and take rigorous tests to PROVE that they should be ALLOWED to have kids” which is eugenics. That’s just the starting line for eugenics.
We are at a point in humanity where there is no meaningful reason why we shouldn’t be structuring our societies around wellbeing for all instead of wellbeing for the “deserving”.
Assume some parents will fail. Build social infrastructure that is designed to support failed kids rather than punish would-be parents.
Parents do not have to be neglectful to fail!
They can be busy, tired, stressed about finances, ignorant, etc. They can want to do the best for their kid and Fail Anyways.
The best thing is to support the children and give them the tools they need to succeed even if the parents are already giving them those tools. Because you can never learn something too much.
Also sometimes parents become disabled or die and family can't always be counted on, and sometimes there isn't other family
idk I can tell that some tumblrinas are not up on fat politics because I see a lot of people saying stuff like “it’s better to be a little fat than waste your life trying to be thin” or like “it’s chic to have a little belly” like okay but there are fat people who are “a lot fat” and have “a lot of belly” which everyone is weirdly silent on all the time. Like the fattest person on earth still deserves to exist in human society with joy and dignity regardless of how they got to that weight or how many health conditions they have as a result of their personal actions…that should be everyone’s baseline here I’m not really sure what’s complicated about it
genuinely I'm so sick of people wanting all fiction to be ethical. can we all just get a little gross with it. the point of fiction is that it's not real. we can be unethical in fiction; same goes with being perverted with fiction, being unrealistic with fiction, and being grotesque with fiction. not all fiction has to be ethical, not every character has to be ethical, and that's okay. can we stop with the puritanism. be gross. be unrealistic. be whatever. if I don't like it it's not my business as long as we're all clear that its fictional.
via ered.bsky.social, the only kinds of unethical fiction:
people in the replies are going "what about books glorifying unethical things" and "what if it's propaganda" and you, my friends, are who this comic was made for
Mentally making a cup of tea and giving a gentle forehead kiss to every struggling writer on my dash right now.
Your story matters, your ideas are good, and someone out there is going to fall in love with your world.
You’ve heard of “i didn’t say it was good, i said i liked it,” get ready for “i said it had some technical problems & didn’t fully deliver on its themes, not that i didn’t like it”
#I voiced a criticism of some of its aspects#which in no way implies I did not like it#“and especially does not imply that I would like to hear a defense of it of the form 'shut up and let people have fun'”
REALLY endorsing these tags from galileosballs
i know it's been said on here and said again but people do so desperately need to genuinely do intentional work to build distress tolerance and start figuring out how to recognize the differences between danger, discomfort, and when a situation that is merely uncomfortable is triggering an emotional flashback in your bodies because it resembles a past situation that actually was dangerous which makes it difficult to realize/believe that this moment is merely uncomfortable.
i spoke to an allistic person who said their autistic classmate had a meltdown in class, during which the autistic classmate collapsed to the floor in the middle of the room, screaming and crying. they said it was "terrifying" and they were arguing for the autistic student to be removed permanently from the program.
when i asked whether their autistic classmate's meltdown was dangerous or merely uncomfortable, they said, "i felt like i was in danger!"
i understand that. but that's not what i asked.
"i shouldn't have to experience that."
yes you should, actually. that's life. upsetting things happen. no one should have to experience any discomfort. but we do. we get stung by bees and sunburns and headaches. we live in bodies in the world.
autistic people are human beings who have the right to exist in society, including during meltdowns. having one class of your entire semester interrupted by a singular meltdown is not anymore of an infringement upon your entitlement to education than having your class interrupted by a fire alarm or cancelled for a snow storm.
one of my peers once experienced a cardiac event 10 minutes into class. it was terrifying. it was desperately upsetting. i was contacted by the school and offered counseling because i happened to be the one who managed the situation until paramedics arrived. everyone was worried about my classmate first and foremost, and then about me. no one blamed anyone, and certainly when my classmate happily recovered and returned to school, no one thought they should be removed from the program.
the difference being that people believe a disabled personal, especially with cognitive disabilities, in crisis are not experiencing something outside of our control, but instead that we are in fact making a choice to make a scene, out of malice.
when people point out that "90% of fanfiction is garbage" as though this is something that reflects on fanfiction in particular and not something that is true of literally any kind of content in any medium and genre
please please please please reblog if you’re a writer and have at some point felt like your writing is getting worse. I need to know if I’m the only one who’s struggling with these thoughts
this is a common phenomenon. the better you get, the more you recognize flaws. the good thing is you can strive to get better. but the bad thing is that you see nothing but flaws. you are actually getting better, but your editing/critical brain is getting tuned up and can see more things to improve. someone post the graph, I can't find it
nvm I found it myself:
"art" can mean any creative endeavor and it definitely applies to writing.
#let me be for real for a moment some of the reasons kanji have so many readings are #they entered the Japanese language as loanwords multiple times at different times of history #so different Chinese pronunciations = different kanji reading #as Chinese pronunciation changed plus a lot of loanwoards entered Japanese as specialised language #some of the readings are kind of euphonic changes depending on what the kanji is attached to (sh sounds vs j sounds vs z sounds a big one) #and some are the old Japanese word that was attached to a kanji with the same meaning = nama #which is also why there are so many homophones since Chinese is a tonal language and Japanese isn't @pudentilla
OHHHH IT'S ONYOMI VS KUNYOMI TIME!! Okay sorry for the caps but this is a subject I actually think is really cool.
So the official term for this, when a kanji is read one way in some contexts and a different way in others, is usually a case of onyomi vs kunyomi. -yomi, "reading" (from yomu "to read") basically categorizes words into whether you read them with the chinese pronunciation or the japanese pronunciation.
There are a lot of complicated factors that go into this but the easiest way for english speakers to wrap their heads around it is that the Japanese language ended up with multiple sets of vocabulary in the same way that the English language did with the Germanic language/Romance language split; you have one set of vocabulary for common, everyday use that derives from germanic vocab, and then another set of vocabulary for fancy, formal use that derives from Latinate vocab. The classic example is using swine to describe the animal, which the Germanic-speaking Anglo-Saxon farmers and handlers would tend to, and porc to describe the meat, which the French-speaking Normans would eat. But pretty much every word in the English language has some degree of casual-formal duplication of this kind.
Much like European scholars did with Latin, a bunch of vocabulary got imported by the literati of Japan starting around about the 5th century in order to have a different and more formal register to talk about certain topics. This was imported alongside the Chinese writing system at the same time, which then over the next few centuries was shifted into a simpler, non-logographic, syllabic script that became hiragana (the wavy one.)
But that means that a bunch of imported Chinese vocabulary was conventionally written in their original-or-close-to-it hanzi form, and spoken with their original-or-close-to-it Chinese pronunciation. Words of this type have a much higher incidence of long vowels, left over from the Chinese where each character would represent a single complex syllable varied by vowel intonation, compared to native Japanese words which are polysyllabic and hit more consonants.
So, the system has evolved in various directions over time, and now there are a lot of ways that a single character can be read depending on positioning and context, but the broad strokes are: if the kanji is mostly on its own, surrounded by hiragana, it will take the Japanese reading (kunyomi) and if it's part of a compound word, paired with other kanji, it will take the Chinese reading (onyomi.) The more formal the text -- especially notable with medical, scientific, or governmental texts -- the more dense and compacted it will get, with a much higher ratio of kanji compounds to hiragana, and a correspondingly higher dose of onyomi readings.
To leave off with one example: the video above highlights (手), which is 'hand.' When it appears by itself surrounded by simple words like participles, it takes the kunyomi te, like in the sentence 'take my hand' (手を握って, te o nigitte.) But if you are using it as part of a more abstraction concept, like in 手動 -- done by hand, or manual, see how the english term underwent the exact same shift into latinate when it gains a level of abstraction? -- then it becomes part of a compound word with another kanji. Now it takes the onyomi shu, to become part of the compound word shudou. Catch that long vowel! If it weren't part of a compound word, that 動 by itself would take the kunyomi hataraki, for motion or action.
Anyway, onyomi and kunyomi, fun!
Some more examples in English:
'Troupe', 'troop', and 'thorp'. Loaned from French twice, as well as the homegrown term for a small village/group of houses.
'Pack', and 'bailey'. Native word and French loan.
"Sir', 'sire', 'seigneur' and 'Monsieur'. All from French at slightly different times and in different contexts.
Same with 'dame', 'dam', 'madam', and 'ma'am'.
'Mister', 'master', 'magister' and 'maître d'. All from Latin and French.
To 'spout' and 'spit'. First is from Dutch, second is native English.
To 'wake', 'watch' and 'wait'. First two are native English, third is from French.
To 'ward' versus 'guard'. Same word, but the second one was borrowed into Latin and then back into English from French.
In English the connections are disguised by using different characters for each word, but it's the same process!
not to be like that but misgendering is still misgendering even if you think you know someone’s gender better than they do. because that’s the basis of literally all misgendering you don’t get a special pass because you’re Transing Them
toph: why do i not get a lifechanging trip with zuko? katara: because if i leave you two alone, you'll probably end up burning a town down
computah, remove ai from everything
computah, destroy all ai data centers
i'm actually curious, what trinkets do you guys have on your keychains? 🗝️
neither a puppyboy nor a puppygirl they call me andogynous
Replacing physical buttons and controls with touchscreens also means removing accessibility features. Physical buttons can be textured or have Braille and can be located by touch and don't need to be pressed with a bare finger. Touchscreens usually require precise taps and hand-eye coordination for the same task.
Many point-of-sale machines now are essentially just a smartphone with a card reader attached and the interface. The control layout can change at a moment's notice and there are no physical boundaries between buttons. With a keypad-style machine, the buttons are always in the same place and can be located by touch, especially since the middle button has a raised ridge on it.
Buttons can also be located by touch without activating them, which enables a "locate then press" style of interaction which is not possible on touchscreens, where even light touches will register as presses and the buttons must be located visually rather than by touch.
When elevator or door controls are replaced by touch screens, will existing accessibility features be preserved, or will some people no longer be able to use those controls?
Who is allowed to control the physical world, and who is making that decision?