This Could Be Better

Hello, my name is Simon. I like the spooky, the weird and the obscure.  Birthday is July 29

[justplainsimon]

To the tune of The Holy Hour by the Cure:

"Mah-ri-oh. Eh, eh, eh. Mah-ri-oh. Eh, eh, eh.

Mah-ri-oh. Eh, eh, eh. Mah-ri-oh. Eh, eh, eh."

[henchforlife]

Happy Pride Month from Dr Orpheus (and his big gay cloak)

[itsmyfriendisaac]

♋ July 11th: Queen Bee & Hip Hop Royalty, Lil Kim.

[spicymotte]

nice sword

[teaboot]

https://www.tumblr.com/harrypotterfuryroad/779574665571139584?source=share

Did you see this? I'm not a TERF or anything but do you have a good argument against this? Just curious to know

oh yeah, absolutely

In this page on the Government of Canada Website titled "Gender diverse offenders with sex offence histories compared to offenders with sex offence histories in the general offender population" published in 2024, a pool of 155 gender-diverse persons with histories of sexual offenses incarcerated between 2017 and 2021 had their records analyzed

Breaking down their stats, we get the following data:

Cis Men: 30% of the incarcerated Cis Male population have a history of sex offenses, amounting to 3,496 individuals.

Cis Women: 6% of the incarcerated Cis Female population have a history of sex offenses, amounting to 31 individuals.

Gender Diverse: 155 of the people included in this study were gender-diverse, and of them, 37% have a history of sex offenses, amounting to 57 individuals.

Trans Women: Of the 57 gender diverse persons with sex offender histories, 49 disclosed that they were trans women, which is 86% of the gender-diverse pool. 14% reported being nonbinary, and 0% trans men.

Or, to summarize: Of 3,739 people in jail with histories including sex offenses in the five years between 2017 and 2022, 49 of them were Trans women.

Now this data gets complicated because people tagged as gender-diverse- including both Trans women AND nonbinary persons- were 44% more likely to be serving sentences of 10 years or more, and being there longer artificially inflates their presence as this data pool is all within the window of 4 years. If a cis person would have finished their time before this study even started, while a Trans person is still kicking around for the same crimes, you're going to see more Trans people lingering in prison.

On top of this, Trans or gender-diverse persons were found to have a higher rate of guilty charges than both men AND women at 42%, with Cis men at 35% and Cis women at 36%.

Seeing as the median Guilty rate between men and women is 35.5, I think it's fair to assume that that's the fairest shake without a gender bias, yeah?

And according to RAINN, 48% of sexual assaults happen at home, with only 10% happening in an enclosed public-access area like a parking lot or garage, which as close as I could get to a public bathroom or changeroom

So to give you some perspective here, if we were to put you into a building with 100 sex offenders who had been to jail, less than 3-4 of them would be Trans women, and of those Trans women, the victims would have most likely been someone they knew, who they likely already had a relationship with, in a private home

And like

a gender-neutral toilet with a door that reaches the ground would already resolve your "man sneaking in with a wig to watch you pee" concerns

Which. I'm not sure. Why we don't just make those doors bigger anyways?

Y'all never had someone's kid peek in at you before? Why do we gotta oppress a minority for me to get a door that lets me shit in privacy

[assignedmale]

[escuerzoresucitado]

[epellucid]

via

[bovid-beauty]

"Fascism"—New Federal Rule Would Require Federal Funding Recipients To Deny Trans People Exist

The rule could have heavy impacts towards trans people across society.

Last week, the Trump administration quietly released a sweeping new federal rule that would use funding threats to force institutions across the country to reject transgender people. The 400-page proposed regulation would codify the administration's anti-trans executive orders into binding federal policy, imposing a blanket prohibition on federal funds going toward "gender ideology"

The proposed rule, formally titled "Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance," rewrites the government-wide framework governing all federal grants across every agency. Among its most consequential provisions, it requires that before a federal grant recipient can receive money, the award must pass a "pre-issuance review" conducted by a political appointee—not a career expert or peer reviewer—to ensure it is "consistent with applicable law, Federal agency priorities, and the national interest." The regulation explicitly instructs these appointees to screen for "denial by the recipient of the sex binary in humans or the notion that sex is a chosen or mutable characteristic." [...] An institution that acknowledges transgender people exist—through its policies, its training, its healthcare, its bathroom access, its HR procedures, its name-change processes—could be deemed to "deny the sex binary" or to “support the notion that sex is mutable” and have its federal funding blocked.

Importantly, the gender ideology prohibition has no age limitation—hospitals could be targeted not just for providing care to minors but for providing gender-affirming care to adults, because prescribing hormone therapy to a transgender patient of any age could be deemed promoting the belief that "sex is a chosen or mutable characteristic."

[junequeer]

THIS IS OPEN TO COMMENT UNTIL JULY 13, 2026

[featherandstorm]

This is all very bad and horrible, but I want to be clear that it’s worse and more sweeping than just eliminating trans research.

This torches everything. And I do mean everything.

A very abbreviated list of its ramifications include (but are not limited to):

ending funding for ALL DEI related initiatives

allowing the government to terminate grants at any point for any reason

preventing researchers from publishing, going to conferences, and being part of academic societies

requiring that topics must support the president’s agenda.

What this means, and if anything I’m under selling it, is the death of science and research in America. It allows the government to restrict any topic they please at a whims notice, putting officials who have no background in the topic in charge of deciding funding continuity. It controls what gets researched and if/how researchers are allowed to share their discoveries. There are no books to burn if the government never allows them to be written. This is fascism plain and simple.

Please, if you only ever write one public comment, this is the one to do.

[kiki-de-la-petite-flaque]

Marlon Brando and Anthony Quinn playing pool during a break from filming Elia Kazan’s “Viva Zapata!” in Texas, 1951.

[ultrakillblast]

HIGHLANDER (1986)

[rylandgraces]

[the most low energy you have ever seen me] we’re about to go crazy mode

[witchrealms]

(x)

[70sscifiart]

Angus McBride's 1966 "Legendary Beasts" series ran in the backs of the weekly magazine Finding Out. Daisy at Beautiful Books has collected all 36 of them over here - this is just half of them!

[phillip-bankss]

5 days til this book comes out! surprise! Insight Editions reached out sometime last year and I got to work making a bunch of illustrations just for this book. im very happy with the work I did and I hope you enjoy it when it comes out 🙇‍♂️

[deceasedcardinal]

[rosenkranz-does-things]

patreon sketch of Denise Bryson 🏳️‍⚧️ happy pride!