Seen a recent uptick in people using the word “sp*z” to mean something not working properly, or someone doing something silly or clumsy etc, and I just want to remind people that this is pretty offensive, the word is a slur derived from “spastic” (which has also been used as a slur) meaning someone with partial paralysis, usually with CP.
Anyway, if you wouldn’t use the word r*tard in that context, consider, like, not using the word sp*z either, yeah?
if you somehow don’t realize how fucking much society hates autistic people, think about how when allistic kids throw a tantrum (likely because they didn't get something they want) everyones like “oh we were all like that once, growing up is difficult, they'll grow out of it with time”. but when an autistic kid has a meltdown because they are in MENTAL AND SOMETIMES PHYSICAL ANGUISH everyones like “that's manipulative behavior, stop being weird, cant you just be normal, you need to act your age, you need to get over (whatever caused the meltdown) get your act together”.
I’m reading this biography on Publius Clodius Pulcher and the author is like:
“Finally, a comment on Clodius’s looks. No physical representation survives, but Cicero’s frequent sport with Clodius’s cognomen perhaps opens the door to speculation. Cicero’s habitual recourse to pulchellus in and of itself means nothing: the dashing Caelius Rufus was called pulchellus Iason; pulchellus was wielded in a different sense, by the famous orator, L. Crassus, against the crippled L. Aelius Lamia, in a cruel, humiliating barb that was much admired by Cicero. Presumably meant the diminutive form to be demeaning to Clodius. Yet the orator’s use of pulcher and pulchellus, while often belittling, never suggests that Clodius is lacking in the good looks and exquisite manners that his name implies–which is the most striking when one considers the Roman proclivity (shared by Cicero and illustrated in Crassus’s treatment of Aelius Lamia) for fleering at ugliness and physical defects generally.”
I know it’s kinda ridic but I 100% live for highly academic biographies discussing the relative hotness of historical figures and trying to still sound academic about it. “Look we can’t prove Clodius was hot but he was PROBABLY hot. I mean, Cicero made some puns. But they weren’t the kind of ironic puns Cicero made when someone wasn’t really hot. They were the kind of puns Cicero made when he was on some level annoyed with the person for being actually hot, and definitely hotter than Cicero. I can tell. I have a degree in this stuff.”
It’s annoying (and sometimes vaguely racist or sexist) when historians try to use relative attractiveness as indication of a person’s morals or politics. But when they avoid bringing moral judgement into settling the “hot or not?” question and just kind of debate it generally I can’t help finding it amusing. It’s like, dammit I’ve spent THIS much time with the primary sources, whether or not I want to I have developed OPINIONS about this.
The best thing to happen to me this year is acquiring a yard.
I can do so many things but also be outside and be with plants.
Pruning, mowing, gardening, shoveling.
It’s like, so perfect.
Everyone needs a yard all the time.