This is so funny dkfjdkfjkffj whaaaat the FBI can come after us??
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
hello vonnie

★

⁂
art blog(derogatory)
Alisa U Zemlji Chuda

No title available

祝日 / Permanent Vacation
occasionally subtle
RMH
wallacepolsom

roma★
Not today Justin
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH

JBB: An Artblog!

izzy's playlists!

No title available
Peter Solarz
sheepfilms
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States

seen from Argentina
seen from Czechia
seen from Brazil

seen from Netherlands

seen from T1

seen from Germany
seen from Morocco

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States

seen from Portugal
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Belgium

seen from United Kingdom

seen from Russia
seen from T1
@katofmanycolors
This is so funny dkfjdkfjkffj whaaaat the FBI can come after us??
Don't use Facebook (including Instagram and WhatsApp), Twitter, TikTok, Tumblr, really any social media app or messenger, forum, or even Discord if you are seeking an abortion. Only use things like Signal (assuming it's still safe) that are heavily point-to-point encrypted.
Tech corporations aren't your friends, they will rat you out to fascists.
this was under a puppet history video
I have been reading a bit on the OTW elections and the whole Tiffany G thing, but most of all, I've been reading comments from people supporting Tiffany saying that she just wants to clear AO3 from all the CSAM (child sexual abuse material) content and I don't know who needs to hear this but:
If someone comes to a predominantly QUEER space (like AO3) and tells you that censorship is necessary to eradicate CSAM... it's not actually CSAM they want to eradicate...
I've seen this type of discourse about Pride and about queer literature and queer movies and queer communities. It's a tried and true technique of the right and conservative movements.
First, they say there is a DANGER to the community through CSAM and they conflate the actual threat of CSAM in the community (we all know someone who thinks that writing a love story between two characters who are 16 is CSAM...), and make you believe that censorship is the only way to PROTECT THE CHILDREN. And since most people are (rightly) mind-bogled at having to explain that of course they don't support CSAM content, they bow down and accept the censorship for the greater good, without anyone actually trying to have a conversation about what qualifies as CSAM (which needs to, you know, actually involve real children and not fictional characters who are 17 and losing their virginity with their crush in a Mature-rated story about high school football and first love based on the author's own experience of losing their virginity at 17 to their crush in high school).
Then, they tell you that there are other forms of DISTURBING CONTENT, and what they really mean is porn that THEY find disturbing, for ex, (and I kid you not, I have seen comments like that) porn featuring disabled characters, which they consider to encourage the exploitation of vulnerable individuals, or BDSM porn (which supposedly encourages violence and lack of consent), or rough porn, or any kind of porn that isn't two (preferably white and skinny) able-bodied people doing it missionary style while lovingly gazing in each other's eyes. SO TO PROTECT VIEWERS, that needs to be banned as well.
And then, they tell you that even that sanitized version of porn is still porn and that people under 18 or under 21 or under whatever age they consider too young to view anything sexual regardless of the fact that not all countries have the same law about the age of maturity, should be free to surf the site without having to *gasp* filter out properly tagged works. So TO PROTECT THE CHILDREN, every explicit content is censored.
And then finally, when all that is left is a sanitized, white-washed, ableist, puritan type of content featuring General-Audience approved gay works of two nice men or two nice women holding hands and chastely kissing each other on the lips... Well guess what? :) CHILDREN SHOULD NOT BE EXPOSED TO QUEER CONTENT SO WE NEED TO BAN THAT AS WELL, and since we've basically done purge after purge before and there are still a handful of people on the website, well surely they won't mind/care anymore, will they?
It's not just a slippery slope, it's something that has been done time and again, and that is why censorship on AO3 will never, never have a positive outcome.
Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
I'm reminded of this:
a professor just used the “:S” emoji in an email
me in 30 years as a tenured professor, in an email to my 8th phd supervisee: “hey how’d the conference go :3c”
*university president walks in on me wearing cat ears*
“ Σ:3 Oh noes!! Sowwy mistew pwesident!! I can stiww has tenure fow good pewfowmance?”
*I’m escorted out by campus security*
when i first wrote this post, the power flickered, a sense of cold dread flooded my apartment, and i had a vision of this reply hovering above me like macbeth hallucinating a dagger. but i continued anyway
no more discourse everybody shut the fuck up and eat some bread
-Jesus at the last supper
Were you listening to me, Neo? Or were you looking at the woman in the red dress?
he’s not valid
who isn’t?
the nsa agent reading this :)
Imagine working hard all day, doing what you can to keep the citizens of your country safe, getting home and thinking “time to unwind! I might check my tumblr dash” only to find this
i diagnose you with bitch
before talkin shit on straight men maybe try talking to some for a period of more than five minutes at a time cause all y’all treat straight men on this website like incels treat women
Dear God.
If these people are defending fucking pedophila there is literally nothing trump could do to stop them from worshiping him.
Conservatives has officially gone off the deep end
What I mean when I say "toxic monogamy culture"
the normalization of jealousy as an indicator of love
the idea that a sufficiently intense love is enough to overcome any practical incompatibilities
the idea that you should meet your partner’s every need, and if you don’t, either you’re inadequate or they’re too needy
the idea that a sufficiently intense love should cause you to cease to be attracted to anyone else
the idea that commitment is synonymous with exclusivity
the idea that marriage and children are the only valid teleological justifications for being committed to a relationship
the idea that your insecurities are always your partner’s responsibility to tip-toe around and never your responsibility to work on
the idea that your value to a partner is directly proportional to the amount of time and energy they spend on you, and it is in zero-sum competition with everything else they value in life
the idea that being of value to a partner should always make up a large chunk of how you value yourself
me: sad because I’m not productive me: not productive because I’m sad
Sweet, free printer
chaotic neutral