I'll sink with this ship, I don't even care

She/Her - Queer - No it's not a slur that's just some terf bullshit

[nudityandnerdery]

Sub-Radio, the band that did Stacy's Dad, coming out with another banger for Pride.

[boomer-mythology-destroyer]

[halondrus]

[cutecipher]

can you put that thing on a leash?

[halondrus]

ok

[mikilavellan]

Neil Gaiman is not a bad writer. He IS a human trafficker and rapist.

JK Rowling is not a bad writer. She IS a dangerous bigot who devotes her substantial resources towards making life unlivable for trans people.

Hans Zimmer is not a bad composer. He IS a man who decided JKR’s actions were not a dealbreaker if it meant money in his pocket.

People on this site have already expounded on the danger of conflating talent and morality.

It is always more important to explain that A) this Artist represents a clear and present danger, abused their platform and money, and must be boycotted to keep others safe than B) this Artist is bad at art

If you’re caught up in spending time trying to convince others of B, you’re wasting time and energy as well as diverting others’ attention from point A.

Or worse! If someone did not find B to be true, they might question the validity of A!

Similarly, “But it’s so good though!” Won’t ever erase the fact of A. Please for the love of God don’t give these fuckers any more money

[mornington-the-crescent]

June 1st

[breelandwalker]

Listen, marketing-as-exploitation discussions aside, Rainbow Capitalism is, has been, and continues to be the canary in the coal mine of social acceptance for the queer community.

If you’ll all pardon my Americentrism for a moment, the amount, visibility, and flamboyance of Pride merch available in clothing, home goods, and comestibles stores is a DIRECT reflection of how safe it is to be queer in public in the United States.

How? Simple. Out groups aren’t profitable. If you’re not “acceptable” in the current social climate, big franchise businesses will not market to you. (Prime example - Look how quickly Target dropped all their Pride merch after having been wall-to-wall rainbows every June for almost a decade prior.)

Sure, capitalism sucks and being viewed as an exploitable marketing demographic isn’t a fun concept.

HOWEVER.

The grim truth is that being normalized enough to be considered profitable by corporations IS A GOOD THING in terms of the barometer of social acceptance.

Same thing goes for smaller businesses that throw kitschy Pride events or even just put a token rainbow flag in the window or somewhere inside the shop. That’s a level of acceptance that DID NOT EXIST thirty years ago, and I can tell you because I was there.

The fact that we can scoff and bitch about being an exploitable marketing demographic nowadays means we have made GIGANTIC strides since the 1990s. It also speaks to the fact that the drive and the conversation surrounding LGBTQ+ rights and acceptance are continuing. And getting louder.

You can be cynical about it if you want. But I will take a store that puts out lip-service rainbow merch over a world that pretends we don’t exist any day of the week. Because that will always mean something.

Sincerely, An Elder Queer

[impostoradult]

Agreed, and also, it has always struck me as a little bit of a double-standard in queer politics when people used to point out the exclusion of queerness from mainstream capitalist products as evidence of their marginalization (e.g., there are no m/m or f/f wedding cards)

Yet, when they start being included, they are like “well, that’s just capitalism taking advantage of us, so it doesn’t count.” Like, you can’t use your EXCLUSION from something as evidence of general societal marginalization and then claim that once you’ve started to be included, it is politically meaningless. You don’t really get to have it both ways. That’s moving the political goal posts.

I get that we shouldn’t consider Target pride merchandise as like the pinnacle of queer politics or even the pinnacle of queer inclusion. I get that inclusion in capitalist intuitions is a very ambivalent form of social progress. But the truth is, capitalism is a big part of what creates our social reality right now (unfortunately).

Capitalism makes TV shows, and movies, and books, and ads, and greeting cards, and toys, and clothing, and, and…

When every single aspect of commercial social reality excludes queerness, that DOES create a real sense of social alienation. I don’t love that capitalism is responsible for creating so much of our collective social reality. But granting that it does, I think we’re forced to accept that our inclusion in it IS politically and socially important.

And yes we should still be trying to resist capitalism as the primary means of meeting human needs. But we can resist treating capitalism as an inevitability or an inherent good, AND ALSO acknowledge that our inclusion within it remains politically important while it still holds so much power and responsibility for creating our shared reality.

[quantummindclassicalheart]

See also a recent article from NPR (published May 30, 2026) discussing how pride celebrations have struggled financially with the loss of corporate sponsorships. Organizing big visible events (and fairly compensating the labor of those who make them possible) is expensive.

Pride celebrations struggle as corporate sponsorships dry up

Public support for the LGBTQ+ community by corporations has become politically risky, public relations expert says.

[shadow-daughter]

Incidentally, with that canary in the coal mine– you see how they’re starting to drop trans merchandising from the line-ups? The canary is getting quieter, folk.

[weedle-testaburger]

i have this hot take with age verification that I'm not only against it because it's intrusive and gross to adults, I also just don't think it's fair to kids and teens either. preventing kids from seeing anything explicit on the internet is basically just a stepping stone to trying to blinker them to the struggles of marginalised people and understanding the world.

and off the back of that, i have an even hotter take: you won't stop teenagers wanting to see explicit stuff and it's not worth trying to. you should be trying to prevent them interacting with adults who might try and take advantage of them through them sneaking into 18+ spaces, not blocking them from privately figuring out their sexuality

[stargoyle]

"This person has a secret onlyfans!" "This artist does NSFW commissions!" "This author writes porn on the side!" I cannot begin to tell you how swag and awesome that is.

[manuciruja]

awww the like button turns into a rainbow when you press it! that's so cute...hey staff what's with all the trans women you keep nuking?

[manuciruja]

i think we should be ridiculing them more for this. you don't get to try and go all "queer website" when your staff likes to go on nuking sprees targeting the trans fem users

[smadsel]

would be remiss not to mention that the rainbow notably straight up just removed the trans flag colors from it. like they’re gone. it’s the progress flag minus the trans flag colors.

[smadsel]

that’s not the whole flag, now is it

[manuciruja]

hey staff what the fuck

[villainessbian]

hey staff don't you think you're being too on-the-nose

[shrodingers-catgirl]

HEY STAFF DONT YOU THINK YOU'RE BEING TOO ON-THE-NOSE

[shittysawtraps]

can i be a big hater about something unrelated for a second

[shittysawtraps]

ok awesome

so i have finished a psychological thriller novel, and have begun the process of doing research so i can prepare to query agents. now, my novel has some pretty intense triggers in it, so i am aware it’s a bit of a hard sell– that being said, many agents have a “do not send me your novel if it has these things” list, so that’s what I’m looking for so i don’t accidentally trigger someone.

so i’m going down this list, and i find this agent. their “do not send me” list includes the following: non-consent/sexual violence, age gaps, teacher/student relationships, stalkers, cheating, everyone dies at the end, miscarriage/pregnancy, and abuse masked as love.

okay, cool! everyone has different tolerances for stuff, and it’s perfectly reasonable to not want to be involved with a story that has stuff you’re uncomfortable with. not the agent for me, but good on them for defining their boundaries.

but then i scroll back up and they’re requesting for gothic horror.

excuse me?????????

gothic horror without pregnancy or miscarriage? gothic horror without cheating? without stalking? gothic horror without major character deaths? GOTHIC HORROR WITHOUT ABUSE BEING FRAMED AS LOVE AND THE INTERROGATION OF THAT DYNAMIC?????

HEY CAN I GET A GOTHIC HORROR WITH NOTHING???

THAT’S JUST A STORY ABOUT A BIG HOUSE

[liberalsarecool]

Billionaires lie. All the time.

[memewhore]

[bananahomo]

I reblogged this last month, tagged it, and said “might as well see if it works.” I used this video as a reference to find all the forms that i needed (which is A LOT, especially if you’re a dependent) and sent them through the mail, not really allowing myself to hope.

dude.

$2,714 of medical debt from my top surgery - gone. im shaking this was such a weight on me for 2 years and it fucking worked. what the fuck.

[minakittengaming]

This is huge. Sharing for my US friendos.

[zillyblog]

Hospitals like to hide these policies under a lot of successive links in obscure places, so if you don't see anything right away, keep looking! Get friends to help! Make it a scavenger hunt. A game where you're assassins sent to slit capitalism's throat

[bigfatbitchdotcom]

Endlessly diabolical how you can't say words like rape and suicide uncensored without either being criticised by idiots or punished by conglomerates.

[bigfatbitchdotcom]

It's not r*pe, it's rape. It's not su*cide, it's suicide. Not unalive, dead. The backbone needs to be reintroduced en masse because softening the blow of these concepts with advertising language does absolutely nothing but allow people unaffected by them to feel not even a sting of what they can do, prompting inaction.

[bigfatbitchdotcom]

And it's been proven that on certain websites, you don't even face a repercussion for using the words as they are. People just started censoring themselves because they feared the potential lack of views and likes and followers which is so nasty itself.

[its-the-blob]

I attended an anti-suicide seminar in college. One of the big takeaways from it was that stigmatizing suicide increases the rate of suicide, because people who are feeling suicidal feel like they can't ask for help. Every time I see babytalk garbage like 'unalive', I think of that.

[ralfmaximus]

Use the real words. Words have power, and they matter.

[nariarts]

Longtime readers may be aware of how much I relish an excuse to bully a company, so I'm sharing the wealth;

Clothing company Patagonia is currently sueing drag queen Pattie Gonia for "irreparable” harm to their brand.

To be clear; Pattie named herself after the region in South America.

So Pattie is asking people to politely ask Patagonia to drop the lawsuit.

I'm extending the invitation to all of you, because sueing a drag queen for 'infringement' in the current political cultural landscape is vile. Especially a drag queen who has raised millions of dollars for non-profits, uses her platform to raise awareness for climate activism, and fully aligns with Patagonia's apparent climate-conscious mission statement.

They're claiming they're sueing for $1. They're actually asking her to stop using her name, and pay over $1 million in legal fees. They're straight up harassing her.

In contrast, drag queen Jan Sport has a Jansport bag line. It's that easy to just... work with a queen.

Anyway. Be respectful(ish), but feel free to be annoying on Patagnoia's socials, asking them to 'DROP THE LAWSUIT'

I think they have a twitter and tiktok too!

[neurotypicalabusesurvivor]

This is a friendly reminder that none disabled people often do benefit from the same accommodations disabled people benefit from.

[yeahokayillreblogthat]

Yeah okay I'll reblog that!!

[multishipperpirateking]

My dad used to work for Vodafone and likes to tell a story about when he was working on a voicemail transcription service.

And there was a woman there who was some form of disability advocate (it was the 90s so her existence in the company was a minor miracle) and apparently she completely blew his mind on that project.

See, he'd imagined that this service was exclusively gonna be for deaf people. Obviously very useful for the very small number of people who couldn't hear their phone, but why would you even own a mobile phone if you couldn't hear?

But she described to him all the times he might want to read a message instead of listen to it. Maybe he was in a loud football crowd. Maybe there was important info that he needed to copy down that was spoken too fast. Maybe he was holding his sleeping newborn (me) and didn't want his phone to be loud and wake them up.

This doesn't feel as revolutionary as all that to those of us that have only ever known phones with the ability 'send text message', but given the timing and placement of this conversation I wonder if this woman and this project is *part of the reason text messaging exists*. The first text (SMS) message was sent by Vodafone UK in 1992 - where + when this conversation was happening - and then for a long time it was supported exclusively for 'messages from the carrier', and this project was an early potential extra use of the SMS protocol.

So Yeh, building for disability is kinda handy..

[the-fallen-blue]

can you imagine how often you would use sign language if everyone knew it

[samcormac]

what’s the rush?

[captainjonnitkessler]

So many political posts I hate boil down to "I don't want to organize and work with people I hate and fight for small, incremental victories, I just want to start a revolution where everyone magically becomes an automaton who acts exactly the way I think they should act"

Like damn man, I want that too. Unfortunately I live in reality though so we're stuck with the first thing.

[captainjonnitkessler]

"Modern movements are too fractured, too aimless, with too much infighting and corruption among the leadership. What we need is a revolution, which famously never have any issues with those things" okay then. Good luck I guess

This whole line of thinking comes down to "the current systems and leadership are bad. What we need is a fresh start with only people who are good, and then all the systems will be good". Which is simply not how anything has ever worked!

[traycakes]

"We don't have enough people, funding, and power to bring about changes through elections! We have to do an armed revolution instead which thankfully doesn't require people, funding, or power to pull off."

[depsidase]