Phineas P. Gage

hoarder of quarters

[phineasgage]

[fyretrobarbie]

Barbie All Around Home Bedroom Playset (2001)

[cyprozombiegirl]

new version cause tumblr staff hate trans women

[tomb-mold]

have you noticed that everything depends on various factors

[staticbluue]

“People should pass a test before being allowed to have kids.” “Isn’t it scary how white people have this inborn capacity for evil?” “I’ll never pass because males and females have different skull shapes.” “Autistic people have a stronger sense of justice than anyone else.” “I don’t want AMABs in my space because they’re dangerous.” “You shouldn’t have access to hormones if you dress like THAT.” “Anyone who does something that awful isn’t human.” “Some people really shouldn’t be allowed to vote.”

This is eugenics. This is phrenology. THIS IS NAZI SHIT, YOU ARE A LEFTIST BUYING INTO NAZI SHIT. YOU ARE NOT IMMUNE TO NAZI SHIT.

[miryalle]

We can all agree that active pedophiles need to die, right?

NOT people with the mental disorder pedophilia. They can receive help.

But those who have ACTED on their urges and touched children sexually? Death. Hell. Scalding gold crowns. Anything awful.

[party-gilmore]

No we can NOT all agree on that.

I am not exaggerating when I say THAT is LITERALLY how you get fascism.

So many people have explained it better than me but

1) how exactly are you determining the line between acting out of mental illness vs. acting in sound mind and willful intent to hurt

2) straight up you might not like it but every single human on this planet has the capacity to BOTH a) commit unspeakable acts of horror, AND b) regret those acts and change and try to help those who've been hurt OR those who can hurt others from doing so. Not just Good People Having A Mental Episode. Yes, even rapists. Yes, even Nazis.

3) also tbh I'm still not over what you think the difference is between "mental disorder pedophilia" and "pedophilia that's been acted on." let's go back to that one again actually like. This isnt some Gold Star Mental Disorder Haver thing where as long as you only have Thoughts it's a mental disorder worthy of help but as soon as you exhibit physical symptoms of the disorder you're beyond saving. NO mental disorder is like that. It's an illness REGARDLESS of if you've hurt someone or not. Outright, there IS no difference between "mental illness pedophilia" and "regular pedophilia." That is NOT a thing. The only differences come down to if someone was able to have a moment of clarity in which they realize they need help and seek treatment, don't realize at all that they're hurting others because of how their mental illness presents itself, or don't care that they're hurting others because of either how their mental illness presents itself OR they are too rich to ever face any consequences for their actions so why would they bother to care in the first place which I would frankly and genuinely posit is it's own kind of disorder

4) the All Pedophiles Must Die gutwrench reaction is understandable, especially if you've been personal affected by rape, but HAS to be put down. Not just because there's no real way to "prove" if someone's mentally ill and/or in which way, if it's about the sex or the violence or the lack of understanding or what EVER. But because anytime you get that broad paintbrush stroke of This Group Deserves Nothing But Death, then ANY group who thinks any OTHER group should be killed off will USE that.

That is LITERALLY what maga and Christian conservatives (and Nazis) did/are trying to do again with queer people. The target used to be mainly gay men, now it's shifted primarily to trans women - brand them as pedophiles, then it'll be easy. People will BEG us to kill them, and we can get away with it totally legally because no one's going to want to defend pedophiles - so all we have to do is call them pedophiles.

5) there's a HUGE difference between saying All X Should Die versus If I Find X Hurting/Attacking Someone I'm Going To Kill Them First.

I find somebody creeping on my nephew? I'm beating the shit out of them until they are no longer a threat. If that means they don't get back then that means they don't get back up. Is that necessarily Good or Righteous? Not particularly. Will I have taken the time to understand their motivations and cleared up any misunderstandings so I'm not actually hurting someone who doesn't deserve it? So I even have the right to DECIDE if they deserve it? NOPE.

Im not in any way saying that it's hands down 100% the right thing to do. At all. Just that realistically, it's what I probably WOULD do.

But that is an INDIVIDUAL reaction, to an immediate, personal situation. That is handling an active threat, protecting someone right there in the moment.

THAT'S the difference between like... the punching out any Nazi on the street things versus the whole kill all pedos rhetoric. With the exception of the kind of wealthy so out of touch with reality that nothing seems to matter, like, Donald Trump, pedophiles aren't out here on street corners actively and intentionally threatening what they're gonna do. They aren't an organized group of militants (wannabe or not) out here self identifying and telling you, to your face, how they're gonna hurt your kids. How they view them. They are not BY DEFAULT actively threatening you and yours in a way that warrants that "stop them NOW by any means before they can mobilize and gain power and expand their platform across my community" response by just existing, the way that fascists are.

The actual THREAT comes at the individual level - when the OTHER ADULTS in these kids lives don't do what they're supposed to fucking do and watch and pay attention to what's going on, and don't step in when they're needed, and now some kid is alone with somebody who no one questioned or reported or ever taught this kid what behaviors weren't acceptable from an adult so the kids could even know to tell somebody what was going on in the first place. The threat is from That Person, Specifically, and only because SO MANY OTHER AVENUES of this kid's support system they were supposed to have FAILED THEM.

So yeah that got a little ramble and long but the main point of my last bit is like.

I'm not telling you not to put a hurting on somebody you find abusing your kids or anybody's kids. I'd kill somebody myself if I came across that situation. But that's someBODY. An individual situation where it's time to act on the moment. Just like if it were somebody breaking into my house or trying to kill me or somebody I care about. On a SINGULAR, individual level. And it may not even be the Right Thing To Do but it's probably what I'm doing. Realistically.

But the "actually all pedos should all die" bullshit is the same thing that's gone around and around and around because NO, actually, that's DANGEROUS FUCKING THINKING and SPECTACULARLY reductive, and SUCH a beautiful straw man argument for Bad Faith Responders because it's so easy to grab that low hanging fruit of "you CAN'T seriously be disagreeing rn EVERYONE knows pedophilia is bad!!! You would actually SUPPORT rapists?!? What's WRONG WITH YOU!!" and eliciting that outrage response so that all of the ACTUAL issues with that train is thought can be just.... swept under the rug.

[miryalle]

You wrote an entire essay about why people should be allowed to bad touch kids or they're MAGA Nazis. Really? 😂

[party-gilmore]

^^^ this is EXACTLY what I mean about how bad faith actors use this as the PERFECT straw man argument.

It makes it so fucking easy for them to COMPLETELY derail reasoning on "HEY, this kind of broad brush thinking is DANGEROUS and has been and continues to be used to target people completedly unrelated to pedophilia, as well as promise dangerous assumptions about what we can and can't tell is related to mental illness or not"

with

"LMAO can you believe this person is actually defending child rape?"

To play on the fact that because everyone CAN actually agree that pedophilia is awful and needs to be taken fucking seriously, the ones who don't bother to actually, you know... read and comprehend reasoning, will just hop right onboard the outrage train and agree with whatever they have to say next.

"wrote a whole essay about why people should be allowed to" WHERE. WHERE. at no point did I talk about anything other than why "-and they should all be killed about it because it's so bad it makes them basically not human" is dangerous and unacceptable and exactly what op was talking about with that's eugenics, it's literally Nazi eugenics, historically and factually.

Honestly outright PROVING the ENTIRE POINT of the original post. Literally, that is Nazi playbook 101. Start with easily agreeable blanket statements, sliiiiiiide them into deeper and deeper pointed attacks.

"rape and sexual violence is a genuinely terrible thing, its abohorrent and horrifying" -> "any one who DOES this thing is abohorrent and terrible" -> "in fact these people are so bad their barely even human and don't deserve to procreate. they should all be locked up in asylums and forcibly castrated or outright killed" -> "hey I heard XYZ group is particularly people to those kids of behaviors. we need to focus on them and get them off the streets."

And this is NOT an exaggeration OR a hypothetical. America LITERALLY DID THIS almost ENTIRELY through the 20th century, focusing primarily on Black, Indigenous, Gay, and Autistic people painting them as idiots and rapists, and then kept TRYING throughout the entire AIDs crisis and gay panic with painting gay men as pedophiles, specifically.

I've got a day job and my lunch is almost up, but later on (if I haven't just wanted my hands in frustration by that point) I can grab a few more articles than the ones below:

The History of Forced Sterilization Campaigns

The US has a long history of forced sterilization campaigns that were driven by the bogus 'science' of eugenics, racism and sexism.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwijpdG92eGVAxWF0PACHaHEBXwQFnoECD8QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fdigitalcommons.chapman.edu%2Fcgi%2Fviewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1127%26context%3Dvocesnovae&usg=AOvVaw0EihVTYL4TgHo5yPTLYG4F&opi=89978449

One in an occasional series about the findings of the President’s Commissions on Slavery and on the University in the Age of Segregation. Th

But in a nutshell,

🔊 WHEN ANY GROUP OF PEOPLE ON THE WHOLE IS CONSIDERED INDEFENSIBLE AND NO LONGER DESERVING OF ANY HUMAN RIGHT, SUDDENLY ANY FACTION THAT WANTS CERTAIN PEOPLE DEAD HAS A REAL EASY WAY TO PAINT IT AS SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE TO KILL THEM OFF AS LONG AS THEY CAN CONVINCE OTHERS THEY WERE PART OF THAT GROUP 🔊

[cios-correct-opinions]

tags from @griseldagrimple

this is extra important to remember. most people who prey on kids aren't even pedophiles! we all need to get less paramisic NOW

@thisisparamisia

[griseldagimpel]

And to tie my tags a bit more strongly to some of the other points being made, some people get into the mindset of "We just need to find the people who sre Intrinsically Bad because they were born with the Bad Brains and do away with them, at which point only the Intrinsically Good people will remain."

This never ends well. (Or, you know, works.)

The result will be half the persecution of, like, people with moral OCD who have spent their whole life refusing to act on the intrusive thoughts and half victim blaming where victims are cast as temptresses in order to absolve the perpetrators on the grounds that they were "overcome" by their desires. (The first will target anyone already deemed a Social Other and the second will be used to exonerate those who are part of the most privileged classes in society.)

[harperhug]

The problem with defending human rights is most of the time you’re defending scoundrels. The reason there are so many bills banning trans people and drag queens from places where children might be is because there is no consensus on what is or isn’t sexual abuse. Conservatives think the mere existence of certain people is sexual abuse. Right now there’s a guy in the news getting accused of possessing CSAM because he gave officers a password that wiped his phone, so he can’t prove there’s not CSAM on there. Use your brains instead of defaulting to “if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.” I don’t close the bathroom door because shitting is against the law.

[zinjanthropusboisei]

Hell yeah CLRG!

[susiephone]

it is genuinely infuriating how many people grasp the concept of "there are several different sects of christianity, some of which are conservative and controlling, but others which are more progressive, and you can't treat the whole religion as a monolith", but absolutely cannot wrap their minds around the idea that islam, the second-biggest religion in the world, is also not a monolith.

[memeuplift]

[dogpuppy]

[randomitemdrop]

Item: Orb of Gorilla Summoning

[ithelpstodream]

[enfranchisement]

[onethousandrbirds]

happy anniversary 

[omni-rhombus]

Oh, hey Charlie, sorry you didn’t make it to the 8 year anniversary

[captain-price-returns]

US Law Enforcement Warns of ‘Anti-Tech Extremism’ as AI Hatred Grows

As Americans stew over the looming risk of job-stealing AI and data centers in their back yards, the feds are raising the alarm about a new

Well just call me a violent anti-tech extremist then.

[queerautism]

They wanna make it illegal to do anything but quietly let them destroy the planet

[achillesinhighheels]

[yossyislandd]

racism literally bleeds through the cracks of everything and if you dare to even barely point it out everyone will kill you

[yossyislandd]

racism runs so deeply in people that if you call it out you are calling out them, and instead of sitting down and examining their own racism they lash out at you for being sooo meansies to them. you don't even have to be talking about anyone's racist behavior in particular because it makes racists so uncomfortable they will come forward themselves and act like you're targeting them specifically. it's okay when they do it because they're doing it in the correct way, in the nice way! they don't mean it like that. in fact they're actually being progressive. you're the cruel one for acting like their racist behavior is racist. you're the problem if you're bothered by their comfort racism. you're the bitchy colored person who makes eeeverything about racism when it so clearly isn't. i'm fucking sick of this.

[no-sharks-on-the-sun]

[eroscestlavie]

I need to stop replying to “how do you make friends in your 30s?” threads because all my answers boil down to “you have to want to know people instead of have friends” and I don’t think people wanna hear that

[eroscestlavie]

It’s like. People can tell if you don’t really like or connect with them. If you aren’t truly enamored with someone you will have a hard time coming up with activities to do together to deepen the friendship. Because you don’t really like that person that much.

[artistformerlyknownasbutttrumpet]

i was training a young person at work, and she referred to sexual assault as "SA" out loud, and i immediately was like, "no, it's sexual assault, call it what it is," bc idgaf if the algorithm overlords have taught y'all that you should fear direct language, how tf do any of you expect to ever address real issues with any amount of seriousness if you can't even say the words? imagine an advocate looking a sexual assault survivor in the eyes and asking "did he grape you?" it's absolutely fucking absurd, but these young interns and new hires are coming into an environment where we deal with survivors of all different kinds of abuse, and they're coming with the mindset that the words are as bad as the actions, and that makes them shitty at the job and look juvenile af

i HATE self-censorship for a lot of reasons, but being in crisis work makes it even more frustrating. who are you censoring for? like i am being so fr, WHO are you censoring for? have you even thought it through? people who have been raped know that they have been raped. if someone attempts suicide or is grieving someone who did, saying "sewer slide" isn't going to protect them from any of the feelings. a murder victim's family isn't going to feel better bc you said "unalived" instead of murdered. if anything, it's just extremely invalidating and othering. it's saying "what happened to you is so bad that i won't even say the word," which is NOT trauma-informed care. you are not protecting survivors/victims when you self-censor. the ONLY things you protect when you self-censor are the puritanical ideologies that are being encouraged by rich fascists who want your money and obedience

say the fucking words, guys. just say the goddamn words before i go insane!!!

[artistformerlyknownasbutttrumpet]

there are a handful of responses to this (some just obvious rage bait, but several genuine and well-meaning) pointing out that "sa" isn't the same as the other terms i highlighted, which i think is a valid criticism, so let me give more context. i did clarify this already in the replies, but just to put it somewhere slightly more public, in the incident i was specifically referring to, my problem was less with "sa" being used, than the fact that she was extremely uncomfortable when i asked her to clarify and say the actual words. acronyms are not inherently evil. social service/non-profit workers speak in acronyms constantly. i say "dv" instead of "domestic violence" a lot, just because it's faster. but! these acronyms are mainly used to communicate with each other, not with clients, and they are said for ease, not for censorship. you'll hear us say "dv" and "domestic violence" in the same breath sometimes, because it has nothing to do with being afraid to say it. my trainee--whom, for the record, i liked a lot and who was a very capable young woman, but who also did not have a lot of experience in the field--did not say "sa" that way. she said it in an undertone voice, like it was a secret or shameful, and clearly wasn't comfortable saying the words in full, which simply cannot happen in the job position i was training her for. hence why i likened it to self-censorship

(also, side note, mb it's different elsewhere, but i pretty much never hear "sa" said aloud. written, yes, but not spoken. i had no idea wtf she was even talking about at first, that's just not something we tend to shorten when speaking)

the thing is, there is a difference between the type of self-censorship i'm referring to, and being able to read the room and know when softer language is needed. english has plenty of euphemistic language built into it already, that softens things without censoring it. like saying to someone, "i heard your mother died" vs "i heard your mother passed away," or "he took his life" rather than "he killed himself"

it works with triggers, too. at work, we might ask a survivor, "did they harm you," or, "did they ever make you perform sex acts you were uncomfortable with" instead of "were you abused" or "were you raped," bc those terms carry a lot of connotation and weight that survivors might not be ready to accept yet. but there's still a directness there that doesn't lessen the impact or shame the survivor

the dumbass algorithm terms are not like this. they aren't the natural evolution of language, as i've seen some people claim. if a term is conceived to first and foremost appease advertisers and corporations, it is not a term that exists to help someone. "unalived" is not compassionate and direct. "sewer slide" "grape" "pdf" whatever the fuck--these are not compassionate or direct. putting a weird slant rhyme on a word so an algorithm doesn't flag it is not "protecting survivors." you're using those terms because you think you're not allowed to say the real ones. that is, by definition, censorship. and when this happens to the point that the terms enter people's every day lexicon, you get people like my trainee, who are so used to thinking they're not allowed to say certain things, that they get uncomfortable and embarrassed saying the thing in a place that exists specifically to deal with that thing

ultimately, it comes down to this: if the purpose of your vocabulary is to promote fear, then your vocabulary is dangerous and should be reevaluated. language is such a big component in a society's belief system. do not let them control yours

[smoqueen-deactivated20251108]

Hey,.. if you were thinking about having sex today, I'm nonbinary fortnite.

[blattella]