Fox with a Fannypack

he/they, asexual, hyperfixated on hazbin hotel😔, banner I stole from tumblr user sporesong

[wizardshark]

99% of queer discourse stops right before they define the true difference between bisexual and pansexual!

[saspitite]

FOR THE LAST FUCKING TIME

BISEXUALS GROW FROM THE GROUND

PANSEXUALS GROW FROM THE CEILING

[bisexual-engineer-girl]

Can someone hold me

[calware]

spiritual successor to my email post

[baradragon]

speaking from a place of privilege (good url)

[baradragon]

some of you should not be reblogging this

[assdad]

[dailyalastor]

[filmphotofranz]

[maalidoesart]

happy pebble pride

[dogpuppy]

[bisexual-engineer-girl]

Boobs in face would fix me, as would head between thighs

[alastor-insanity]

Inspired by this post

[dogpuppy]

[diosapate]

[tahthetrickster]

me: i have a very specific tumblr accent meme im thinking of that surely i should be able to pull up by searching the text in the meme

the most dogshit useless decimated search engine in the entire world:

[tahthetrickster]

i did find it btw but having a COMPUTER address me like it’s a person sent me into such an incandescent rage i nearly pitched my phone clear across the room

[aesths-deactivated20220604]

[ode-on-a-grecian-butt]

[overtherails4u]

[xxceus]

Magma sketch

Alastor isn’t sure how he feels about kissing yet, but Vincent is happy to keep volunteering (totally not projecting)

[dragon-in-a-fez]

so much of the "research" on "phones bad" is just statisticians congratulating themselves in a circle

[dragon-in-a-fez]

example: I am right now reading an article on "phubbing", which is apparently the term for ignoring people you're with in order to pay attention to your phone. we'll slide right past the claim that this is a normal word people use.

the authors have developed a "phubbing scale" and demonstrated that it has strong correlation with the existing "maladaptive technology use" scale. from this, they conclude the "phubbing scale" is a valid and useful metric.

the "maladaptive technology use" scale, if you go and read that paper, has shown strong correlation with the "problematic smartphone application use" construct.

have you caught the problem yet? nowhere has it been proven that scoring high on any of this is actually bad for you.

imagine someone told you "if the ground is wet it probably rained recently". then you talked to someone about rain and they said "if it rained recently there were probably clouds". yeah okay sounds reasonable. then all three of these people told you their research proves clouds, rain, and wet ground are all signs of demonic possession in giraffes. you'd be like hold up, I think you lost me somewhere

[ollievion]

I don’t need a study to know using my phone makes me feel like shit

[dragon-in-a-fez]

do different things on your phone then. I'm guessing you haven't written off paper as a technology just because tax forms make you want to cry

[weeknightbrutal-deactivated2026]

It's fair to be skeptical of research into problematic mobile phone usage on the basis that while some studies have shown it to be correlated with anxiety, insomnia, and depression, correlation is not causation and it is difficult to establish a causal relationship when studying this kind of problem. It's also fair to be skeptical of psych research in general due to the problems that are pervasive in the field.

But being not just skeptical but confident that you've debunked all the extant research on the basis that...the dumb statisticians never even bothered to check if this was actually bad for you LMFAO IDIOTS is just plain anti-intellectual though.

[dragon-in-a-fez]

> spend 5 years getting a PhD in youth and digital media

> express annoyance with a common failing of academic writing in your field

> get called anti-intellectual

[dragon-in-a-fez]

now reading a paper where the researcher:

asked students to volunteer to take a "screen-free challenge" where they didn't use electronic devices in class for a semester

recorded students' views on the challenge at the end of the course, and found that most of the students who participated had positive views while most of the students who didn't participate had negative views

completely ignored that this might just mean "people who thought something was a bad idea didn't do it", and instead concluded "the screen-free challenge leads to more positive views on the learning experience"

I'm getting whiplash from all the looking into the camera I am doing here

[allore]

Just to clarify, they only recorded the students’ views at the end of the study?? They didn’t ask the students what they expected at the beginning or ask why they participated??

That seems like such a basic step to mitigate your #3!

[dragon-in-a-fez]

the thing you have to understand is that "screens bad" research gets published so easily you can basically make every research mistake ever invented and be fine