spammin words and supf @heireauwords - Tumblr Blog

Disgust has absolutely no ethical weight. If you are basing your ethical positions on the emotion of disgust you should stop, it is entirely unjustified and leads to a huge amount of harm.

word-for-today

Word for today: wisdom of repugnance

The logical fallacy that because something disgusts you it must be bad

obscenicon-deactivated20231123

this is probably the funniest example of a tumblr user simply not reading the post theyre reblogging at all

the-nerdy-autist

Alright it might not have ethical weight.

But you still don't get to go to the library covered in bodily fluids. It's not an ethical weight but it is a SAFETY HAZARD.

luigibottl

Did you read the post either? "You shouldn"t go to the library covered in bodily fluids because it's a safety hazard" isn't an argument that is evoking disgust

the-nerdy-autist

Caring about OSHA and health regulations is disgust now everybody! Congrats. Your response is exactly what I'm critiquing.

luigibottl

That is literally the exact opposite of what I said. I said that it ISN'T and argument evoking disgust.

Again: Do you read the posts that you are responding to?

sunstormbudgie

The funny thing about this is I've seen basically this exact conversation play out on Tumblr multiple times. It's basically a guarantee at this point that if anyone says "just because something disgusts you doesn't mean it's morally wrong", someone will read it as "you shouldn't be disgusted by things that are bad" or "if something disgusts you that means it's actually good".

And like, it's such a basic logical error to make. It's equivalent to if I said "not all animals that have four legs are dogs" and someone replied with "Well MY dog has four legs!!! What do you have to say about that??!". Forget reading comprehension, I think we need to start teaching people the basics of formal logic. "Not all A is B" is not the same as "all A is not B". Are people so allergic to nuance that they are incapable of comprehending the humble Venn diagram?

alienaficionados

““When I was about 20 years old, I met an old pastor’s wife who told me that when she was young and had her first child, she didn’t believe in striking children, although spanking kids with a switch pulled from a tree was standard punishment at the time. But one day, when her son was four or five, he did something that she felt warranted a spanking–the first in his life. She told him that he would have to go outside himself and find a switch for her to hit him with. The boy was gone a long time. And when he came back in, he was crying. He said to her, “Mama, I couldn’t find a switch, but here’s a rock that you can throw at me.” All of a sudden the mother understood how the situation felt from the child’s point of view: that if my mother wants to hurt me, then it makes no difference what she does it with; she might as well do it with a stone. And the mother took the boy into her lap and they both cried. Then she laid the rock on a shelf in the kitchen to remind herself forever: never violence. And that is something I think everyone should keep in mind. Because if violence begins in the nursery one can raise children into violence.””

— Astrid Lindgren, author of Pippi Longstocking, 1978 Peace Prize Acceptance Speech (via jillymomcraftypants)

albertcamuesli

no writing workshop can help you improve your writing as much as this screenshot can

cannibalcaprine

i feel like we don't appreciate these days how much the twin towers sucked, like, design-wise

they were contemporarily hated for just being these giant grey monoliths

like there probably could've been an easier way to get rid of them, but they probably needed to go either way

tgirl-subway-the-dark-ages

crying at this. the curb is brutalist. the sidewalk is brutalist. house made of concrete bricks is brutalist. lmao??

cue-jay

mclennonyaoi

i hate australian people they need a dumb fucking nickname for every single word. can’t even get in a car accident without some australian asshole coming up to you and saying “oh gotcha self in a carblammy there aintcha mate” kill yourself and go to hell

mclennonyaoi

fuck off are you serious?

mclennonyaoi

oh my god

mclennonyaoi

how do you have 2 silly words for a car crash

brucebocchi

two years later and BIG MEATY MEN SLAPPIN MEAT is still the funniest thing that’s ever happened

abigail-rytel

Happy Big Meaty Men Slapping Meat Monday

sometipsygnostalgic

Atlus plays social change in their games like Eichiro Oda plays with character deaths- They want it both ways.

Just as Oda will write a beautiful character death, milk it for all it's worth, and have it revealed the character's completely fine because he doesn't want the characters to have a depressing afterparty,

Atlus will use the provocative themes of social justice and institutional change, only to narrow down the world's problems to a "few rotten eggs". Characters in Persona games never truly challenge the system, in every situation where they're not immediately being oppressed they will be good little japanese children and work hard at school and train to be police officers and be homophobic.

The opening of Metaphor RePhantazio demonstrates this in full action. While the characters of the fantasy world are shown dealing with racism and poverty, religious authoritarianism, and so on, the Human world (...Tokyo) is shown by contrast as a "eutopia" where everyone "lives by one tribe" under "a leader who works for the people" and "rich and poor alike live as one".

What liberal shit lol

itsaboringname

A lot of people seem to be soothed by the idea of the social organism. It would mean that inequality is inevitable and natural and not actually harmful, and the only thing you need to do is be polite to the janitor. Any harm done to people in the process of upholding inequality can be dismissed as inevitable consequences for selfishly stepping out of their given station, threatening the whole.

sometipsygnostalgic

Lots of people are soothed by the thought that they are superior to others as well, that those who fail in society do so because they didnt follow the system, or because the system had a jam in the cog.

These people do not realise that the system itself depends on inequality in order to function, that the way it works means people can only succeed if others fail. Or they do realise this and want to protect their station.

ruinedchildhood

cock-holliday

I know there's the funny ha ha of a capitalist's worst nightmare of a product being too durable you don't need to replace it, but the situation is actually quite interesting to look into

https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/tupperware-brands-files-chapter-11-bankruptcy-2024-09-18/

A lot of articles tend to point towards a lack of "relevance" but ultimately that's not what is happening.

One of Tupperware's biggest hurdles is availability, not demand. They previously relied on independent sellers, down to individual independent sellers, like the Tupperware Parties of yore (people, usually women seeking financial independence from the 50s onward, would hold events to sell Tupperware to other suburban women -- similar to Avon). 2022 was the first year Tupperware could be found in places like Target. At All. Their exclusivity and middle(wo)men decreased their reach as the parties became less and less of a thing.

The next issue for Tupperware is in manufacturing. It only has a single US plant (which it now closed) and struggled post-(early)covid to pay for rising costs of plastic and transportation of materials.

THEN Tupperware got fucked by investors trying to make bank first on their success and then also on their failure as they got swept into "meme stock" betting, where inexperienced traders gamble on stock around jokes/irony.

So ultimately, Tupperware has failed to get with the times as it has always relied on suburban lady sales while countless imitation products hit shelves in places where working class people shop for cheaper and sometimes comparable products, the cost to make a good product went up and as Tupperware struggled, investors and gamblers who are addicted to Line Going Up cashed in on betting on their failure rather than success, and because Tupperware is so synonymous with plastic food storage, IP gremlins are more than delighted to crash and burn a company to get it on the cheap and turn it around to make the numbers go back up again.

Rather than a "oh the woe of durability" story, or lament that a product is not used anymore, this is an excellent microcosm of the vulturistic nature of capitalism.

Tupperware, known the world over for its plastic food storage containers, has filed for bankruptcy after years of falling popularity and fin

thepantyreckless

How dare you read the article and add nuance to this headline upon which I may project my grossly uninformed postulations of Our Society and consumer behavior.

therainstheyaredropping

> The college I attended was small and very LGBT friendly. One day someone came to visit and used the word “gay” as a pejorative, as was common in the early 2000s. A current student looked at the visitor and flatly said, “we don’t do that here.” The guest started getting defensive and explaining that they weren’t homophobic and didn’t mean anything by it. The student replied, “I’m sure that’s true, but all you need to know is we don’t do that here.” The interaction ended at that point, and everyone moved on to different topics. “We don’t do that here” was a polite but firm way to educate the newcomer about our culture. […]

> It turns out talking about diversity, inclusion, and even just basic civil behavior can be controversial in technical spaces. I don’t think it should be, but I don’t get to make the rules. When I’m able I’d much rather spend the time to educate someone about diversity and inclusion issues and see if I can change how they see the world a bit. But I don’t always have the time and energy to do that. And sometimes, even if I did have the time, the person involved doesn’t want to be educated.

> This is when I pull out “we don’t do that here.” It is a conversation ender. If you are the newcomer and someone who has been around a long time says “we don’t do that here”, it is hard to argue. This sentence doesn’t push my morality on anyone. If they want to do whatever it is elsewhere, I’m not telling them not to. I’m just cluing them into the local culture and values. If I deliver this sentence well it carries no more emotional weight than saying, “in Japan, people drive on the left.” “We don’t do that here” should be a statement of fact and nothing more. It clearly and concisely sets a boundary, and also makes it easy to disengage with any possible rebuttals.

> Me: “You are standing in that person’s personal space. We don’t do that here.” > Them: “But I was trying to be nice.” > Me: “Awesome, but we don’t stand so close to people here.”

> Them: Tells an off-color joke. > Me: “We don’t do that here.” > Them: “But I was trying to be funny.” > Me (shrugging): “That isn’t relevant. We don’t do that here.”

kitswulf

I really really do want to endorse this. Making a person’s behavior about capital-M Morality is a great way to get people to dig in their feet and escalate situations. By going “Hey, that behavior doesn’t fit in this context.” it removes a ton of the resentment and toxicity on both sides of the interaction.

tomatosauce5

I desperately want to read a story about a typical YA romance protagonist ending up at the Otherverse faerie courts. I want to see some oh so stubborn and rebellious 18 year old named Fiora Emberbloom get involved in the most brain-melting fae plots imaginable

sandmandaddy69

oarfjsh

they probably cant love me back in a human or even mammalian sense, but my goldfish with their smooth pea-sized brain have learned to trust that i will make them better when they are sick. i feel like crying about this often

cantabilechaos

Maybe Princess the tarantula never had anything resembling what we as humans know as emotions, but she still came out of her burrow and up to the glass when we’d talk to her and used to stare at the drawing I’d tape to her terrarium. Maybe she couldn’t even comprehend what we were, but she knew we were there to take care of her. And even if she never showed that sort of curiosity or trust we’d still love her.

gay-jesus-probably

Idk if Munchie the praying mantis felt love for me, but I do know he trusted me enough to climb onto my hand when offered and was comfortable with allowing me to carry him places despite me being absolutely massive in comparison to him. So that's close enough in my book.

anarchistmemedistro

doubleca5t

Expanding a bit on the post I just reblogged, I absolutely HATE how a surprisingly large portion of the population now thinks that feminism is synonymous with being a "girlboss". The idea that working some kind of professional job and being successful at it is the only way to do feminism is insane. People will literally say "feminism has failed us" or "I'm giving up on feminism" when they're unhappy with their jobs. Babes idk how to explain this to you but that is not a problem with feminism that is a problem with your job. You don't need a rich man to provide for you while you take care of the kids you need a goddamn union and some paid leave

doubleca5t

The reason why feminists of past generations fought for middle to upper class women to leave the house and join the workforce was not because they thought working a job is some kind of emotionally fulfilling activity. They fought for that because housewives at the time were completely at the mercy of their husbands. If you were a housewife and your husband was abusive, or you just didn't love him anymore and wanted out, you had nowhere to go. You had no money because he controlled the finances, you had no car or place to stay because his name was on the title for both, you had no job because you stayed at home and no education or work experience with which to get a job because you probably got married pretty young. The point of getting women into the workforce was to make women less dependent on men because if you depend on someone for the roof over your head and the food on your plate, they can do whatever the fuck they want to you and you'll have absolutely no recourse.

The natural next step of this thought process should be "ok, now women are in the workforce, they are not dependent on men in the way they once were, how can we change the structure of work such that it doesn't make everyone fucking miserable" giving up on feminism because your predecessors fought for the right for you to have a well-paying job and your job sucks is such an intellectually lazy conclusion to come to.

Like hey, if you've ever thought "working for a living is miserable, I wish I had a man to pay all the bills" do yourself a favor and ask yourself why that was the solution your brain went to? Why is it that when you feel like work is sucking your soul, the first solution you go to is to become a housewife? Maybe it's because as a girl, you were taught that being a housewife is a good and admirable thing to do, and even though you were also taught that it's good to have a career as a woman, everyone for your whole life has always been subtly, gently nudging you toward the idea of "settling down". Have you considered that perhaps that is an expression of a system of social organization that prioritizes the needs of men over women and encourages women to submit to the whims of men? You know, like some kind of *patriarchy*? Damn if only we had some kind of ideology to combat that...

patricia-taxxon

the thing is, if your younger self was a bigot or an abuser, u can't make people forgive you. but you still gotta forgive yourself, like that's non-negotiable, dude. that happens before u can even ask the question of earning forgiveness from anyone lese

patricia-taxxon

oops, in your attempt to martyr yourself out of respect for your victims you accidentally sabotaged your own ability to conceptualize yourself as anything but a perpetual evildoer who is always one bad day away from hurting everyone you love, all but guaranteeing history to repeat itself. rookie mistake

patricia-taxxon

im gonna try explaining myself, cus im a gambling addict and im waiting for the day that it actually works.

"forgiveness" is personal, that's why I said in the post that you might inflict harm on people for which they can never forgive you, but that's their quest. if you abuse someone, you can't go no-contact with yourself. you actually keep living in your own head indefinitely, and ultimately you need to learn to live with yourself in order to continue living a full life without further harm. this is not necessarily an anti-carceral thought, although i am generally anti-carceral myself. I simply want people to like, fix their heart and atone for real with measured accountability & self love instead of dissociating, self-marking themselves forever and guaranteeing their recidivism.

You and a remorseful abuser would both think I'm giving the easy, coddling path. It's actually the tough pragmatic path in disguise.

dark-fire-thoughts

Ok. I see where you going, but I strongly disagree. The one person who can't be allowed to forgive ones crimes is oneself.

Even if everyone else has forgiven you for the abuse you did, you must never allow yourself to let what you did be forgiven. Once you've done that, you've gotten to the point where you might do it again.

Never let up. Always strive towards improvement. Never let yourself live down the horrors of the past. Only by comparing ourselves to who we were can we grow.

patricia-taxxon

this is called OCD

yuyurana

It’s so fucking frustrating to argue about this on tumblr.com. Because people might pay lip service to the idea of criminal justice reform or even prison abolition. But deep down they always come back to the Calvinism of it all: there are good people (victims) and bad people (abusers) and once someone has revealed themselves to be an abuser they can never be forgiven, never be part of society again.

And if you believe the world works like that one other thing also has to be true: You know you are a ‘good person’, so nothing you ever do could be truly abusive. You could never truly harm another person. And if you did they must have deserved it. Because you are a good person.

And wow, does that not just sound like something abusers usually say, when confronted with their own behavior?

I would leave the rest up to the reader but because we are on the piss on the poor reading comprehension site here, I’m going to spell it out: get comfortable with your own fallibility. Acknowledge that you could indeed severely harm someone else. And that means that you NEED to learn to forgive yourself.

raqualswonderfunblog

madpunkart-deactivated20240628

my favorite way to frame this has been in the context of boundaries.

a boundary is not about someone else's behavior. it's about mine. i find this to be particularly helpful when folks want to argue with me re: respecting me as a trans person vs. "free speech."

instead of saying things like, "You WILL call me by my name," for example, my boundaries sound like, "If you continue to deadname and/or misgender me, I will no longer give you access to me."

of course, some folks have inevitably argued with me anyway, usually by attempting to make me feel guilty for "punishing" them for what they perceive to be a "difference of opinion." my response is the same every time:

I remind them that they're correct. They do have the freedom to speak to me however they like. But freedom of speech does not = freedom from consequences. In this case, the consequence is that I will remove people from my life and/or cease communication with those who insist on denying my humanity. this is a no tolerance policy — because, wouldn't you know, I have the freedom to do that.

it's essentially the social equivalent of the Scientific Method: fuck around and find out.

the-haiku-bot

my favorite way

to frame this has been in the

context of boundaries.

Beep boop! I look for accidental haiku posts. Sometimes I mess up.

hypokeimena

i love long distance / online friendship specifically. very much. like there are... patterns and ways that distance specifically creates bubbles of understanding and knowledge and intimacy... wanna be able to tell when you're on your way to work because you backread on your commute and i see you in my notifs. 2 of my friends put their feet in the opposite sides of the atlantic ocean on a phone call once. love getting people's flight numbers so i can see on the tracker that they're delayed on tarmac and text them to cheer em up. love a shared playlist love a spotify jam love streaming. getting a goodnight message while you're making lunch and knowing how time is passing for someone halfway around the world... love making dinner and getting ":V :V :V" reactions in the chat and having to figure out what dinner emoji to reply with. when you get to hear all the little things... you know? sometimes you are actually closer to someone when you are riding around in their pocket all day.