kerasines

kim | 30s

[reticent-vampire]

[hollowwaveremnant]

I just want to cradle him 😭😭😭😭

[tomb-mold]

the problem is i really do love staying up until one billion o'clock. it just cant be helped

[sunanthrope]

"But what if people will pretend to need this accessibility option so they can be lazy! People who don't need it will use it!!" I don't actually care

I dont care if 9/10 of the people who use the wheelchair ramp arent actually in wheelchairs. As long as the 1 person who needs it has access to it.

I dont care if 9/10 people who use the automatic push button on the library door can actually push the door open themselves. As long as the 1 person who the door is too heavy for gets to use it.

I dont care if 9/10 people who buy the can tab opener, or the little guitar clamp that holds the chords for you, or the hand grip that helps you hold chop sticks, don't need any of it and just get it to "be lazy". As long as the one disabled person who needs it gets access to it.

I do not care. Oh my GOD I do not care. As long as there's a disabled person on this planet who the accessibility device will benefit, the accessibility device is necessary.

Also, if you're so worried about people being "lazy" by using accessibility devices, MORE worried than you are about disabled (visibly or not) people not having access to them, you have unchecked ableism you need to work through.

[messvoid]

Let gremlin Armand behead people!

[animentality]

[foone]

BTW, just to make sure everyone knows, this isn't just some internet rando commenting on her observations on the internet.

They are an Assistant Professor of Media Industries at New York University and literally just finished writing The Apple II Age: How the Computer Became Personal, a book on the history of the computer industry in the 70s.

This tweet isn't just an observation, it's the result of years of research and study. And it's absolutely true.

[screampotato]

Suddenly struck with a need to explain to you how boat pronouns work (I work in the marine industry).

When you're talking about the design of the boat, you say "it".

When the boat is still being built, your say "it".

When the boat is nearing completion, you can say "it" or "she".

When the boat is floating in the water you probably say "she", unless there is still a lot of work to be done (e.g. no engine yet) then you say "it".

When the boat is officially launched and operating, you say "she". If you continue to say "it" at this point you are not incorrect but suspiciously untraditional. You are not playing the game.

If you are referring to a boat you don't really know anything about you may say "it" ("there's a big boat, it's coming this way"). But if you know its name, it's probably "she" ("there's the Waverley, she's on her way to Greenock").

If you are talking about boats in general, you say "it" ("when a boat is hit by a wave it heels over")

If you speak about a boat in complimentary terms, it's "she" ("she's a grand boat"). If you are being disparaging it may be it, but not necessarily ("it's as ugly as sin", "she's a grotty old tub").

If she has a boy's name, she's still she. "Boy James", "King Edward", "Sir David Attenborough"? The pronoun is she.

If it's a dumb barge (no engine), you say it. But if it's a rowing boat (no engine), you say she.

I hope this has cleared things up so that you may not be in danger of misgendering floating objects.

[glitched-out-mess]

[theramblingvoid]

Hit "view post" and lost it

[screampotato]

Suddenly struck with a need to explain to you how boat pronouns work (I work in the marine industry).

When you're talking about the design of the boat, you say "it".

When the boat is still being built, your say "it".

When the boat is nearing completion, you can say "it" or "she".

When the boat is floating in the water you probably say "she", unless there is still a lot of work to be done (e.g. no engine yet) then you say "it".

When the boat is officially launched and operating, you say "she". If you continue to say "it" at this point you are not incorrect but suspiciously untraditional. You are not playing the game.

If you are referring to a boat you don't really know anything about you may say "it" ("there's a big boat, it's coming this way"). But if you know its name, it's probably "she" ("there's the Waverley, she's on her way to Greenock").

If you are talking about boats in general, you say "it" ("when a boat is hit by a wave it heels over")

If you speak about a boat in complimentary terms, it's "she" ("she's a grand boat"). If you are being disparaging it may be it, but not necessarily ("it's as ugly as sin", "she's a grotty old tub").

If she has a boy's name, she's still she. "Boy James", "King Edward", "Sir David Attenborough"? The pronoun is she.

If it's a dumb barge (no engine), you say it. But if it's a rowing boat (no engine), you say she.

I hope this has cleared things up so that you may not be in danger of misgendering floating objects.

[glitched-out-mess]

[theramblingvoid]

Hit "view post" and lost it

[seracadash]

(goverment voice) we need to protect the children from pornography so our plan is to remove their eyes so they would never see something so traumatic. if you are against removing children's eyes you are basically a pedophile

[happydivorce]

the first thing u need to understand about athletes is that they are cringe losers bc they skipped school in hopes of never having to work a real job. the second thing you need to understand abt athletes is that they are first and foremost workers whose years of lucrative labour are capped by the very real limit that the strain of that selfsame work puts on their bodies which means they retire at an age before most people's careers even really take off and are expected to get by for the rest of their lives on the money they earned those few years. the third thing you need to understand is that they want to fuck their coworker.

[imkeepinit]

Judith Butler, philosopher: ‘If you sacrifice a minority like trans people, you are operating within a fascist logic’

[directactionforhope]

Feels like a good time to remind certain people that this is coming from Judith Butler, who is not just a leading feminist philosopher, but also THE COFOUNDER OF QUEER THEORY

The literal cofounder of queer theory as an academic field says that abandoning trans people is fascist logic.

The voices in our community trying to exclude us may be loud, but they are not right, and they do not speak for the community as a whole or our history or anything at all.

Trans people belong here. We always have, and we always will.

[reticent-vampire]

[imsobadatnicknames2]

Accidentally refreshed my dash before I could reblog the post I wanted to reblog, but it's legitimately funny how many "walkable cities bad" talking points are just 1) assuming that "walkable" means "CARS ARE BANNED FOREVER AND EVER NOBODY IS ALLOWED TO EVER USE A CAR" and 2) then going "and how do you plan to deal with [problem that only exists due to infrastructure that prioritizes cars] without cars????"

Like "and when you go grocery shopping how do you plan to carry 8 bags full of groceries home without using a car?". Well turns out that "going to the store every 2 weeks to buy 8 bags full of groceries which you have to carry home in one trip" is not like. a universal feature of grocery shopping. The act of grocery shopping doesn't usually take that form unless you live in a place where the nearest grocery store is a 45-minute drive away.

I don't even live in a particularly walkable city but I have a couple grocery stores close enough that my grocery shopping mostly takes the form of "popping in to buy a handful of things on my way home a couple times a week"

[avidcollectorofdust]

Really glad predictive text exists. Should i bring my own parking lot

[fictionalgod]

[dragon-in-a-fez]

if I see one more "why age verification is bad" post that doesn't even bother to mention that locking young people out of huge sections of the public sphere - literally the stated goal and primary impact of this shit - is wrong in and of itself I will simply start hitting people with bricks

[fractally]

One of my less popular takes is outside of the occasional homophobic penetration anxiety fueled chirps---and those are only coming from the most fervent, least self-aware homophobes---I think the hockey world by and large de-eroticizes Shane and Ilya's relationship. Fandom often imagines the opposite, because fandom pretty much only knows how to eroticize relationships, and projects that dynamic onto the fictional public. But gay relationships are more often de-eroticized.

I think with Shane and Ilya's marriage it's this dual consciousness thing where everyone knows they're married, obviously, it was a huge deal. But it's like a quantum marriage, unless you're looking directly at it it's just not perceived. Rookies and trades are completely taken aback the first time they see Shane and Ilya snuggle together at the bar after a game, or kiss, or head off to their shared room. It's like oh right. Right. They're married. Obviously they would---right. Sure. We all saw the kiss. I guess. I kinda tried to forget about that.

In general I think no one upon no one wants to imagine two of hockey's greats being sincerely attracted to another man. That's like---fucking embarrassing. These are the guys you idolized most in the entire world, and now...? The cognitive dissonance is too much, so most just ignore it. Shane and Ilya are constantly having to remind people that they are in fact each other's husbands. They're going to All-Stars and some assistant keeps calling Shane up to ask if he wants event tickets for his partner or family and finally he's like "my husband already has an event ticket he's playing in the goddamn game."

Now I do think the Cens team, org, and home media are pretty good about it, they know Ilya and Shane personally and they've had a long time to wrap their heads around the idea that they're together. So they talk about it normally and causally. I think the Cens home announcers in particular love to drop marriage tea they manage to get from Shane and Ilya in the hallways and such. Stuff like "You know Ryan, I asked Shane this last week....he told me he can't carpool with Rozanov anymore because their music tastes are too different [cue for cheesy announcer laughter]"

But when the Cens games are national broadcast? Oh it's a shit show. The national announcers are ALWAYS weird as fuck about it, being evasive or awkward every time Ilya and Shane interact at all. Cens fans get super annoyed every single time and take to Twitter and Reddit en masse to complain. It basically becomes a meme among NHL fans that if a Cens game is picked for national broadcast the Cens fandom is gonna be rabid for the night. Ron Lemon becomes infamous for sparring with Cens fans on the topic, until he becomes practically banned from Ottawa (if he's seen around the city people legitimately get pissed off)

[tilthat]

TIL that there is journalism equivalent to the Bechdel Test. An article about a female scientist fails the “Finkbeiner Test” if it mentions one of seven topics regarding her womanhood

via reddit.com

[prowlick-deactivated20210420]

The fact that she’s a woman

Her husband’s job

Her child-care arrangements

How she nurtures her underlings

How she was taken aback by the competitiveness in her field

How she’s such a role model for other women

How she’s the “first woman to…”

[hedwig-dordt]

Okay, one quote, and then you absolutely have to read the whole thing. 

Still, the virtue of some rules in Aschwanden’s test is difficult to see at first. Take the rule of “no firsts.” In the comments section below her post for Last Word on Nothing, Finkbeiner explained that no sooner had she taken the vow to ignore gender, than she caught herself writing that the astronomer she was profiling was the first to win a certain award. After a reader urged her to stick to her pledge, she removed it.

“The fact that she’s the first woman to do that says a lot more about the prize-giving committee than it does about her,” Finkbeiner explained in our interview. “So if I were going to put that into a story, it would be a story about prejudice in that prize committee.”

It blew my mind, because she’s right. The fact that there’s some many firsts left is the result of bias in the committees NOT IN THE WORK WOMEN DO