The Idealistic Cynic @theidealisticcynic - Tumblr Blog

ferrisbueller

this is great

rich-homie-john-deactivated2020

wow a dramatic twist of fate

colachampagnedad

im reblogging this for everyone who wanted to see them get jumped

poppunkkid-deactivated20220930

thinksquad-deactivated20190405

The idea has not been popular.

Sweden may well have among the most accepting views of abortion in the world — one recent poll found that 84 percent of the country supports awoman’s right to have an abortion whenever she wants one. Yet a proposal from a Swedish group to offer men the right to a “legal abortion” of an unborn child has not been met with enthusiasm.

The idea, proposed by a regional branch of the youth wing of the centrist Liberal Party, would allow a potential father to legally abdicate his responsibility toward the child up to the 18th week of a woman’s pregnancy. The man would lose any rights to visit the child but also would not pay any child support he may otherwise be required to contribute.

Marcus Nilsen, chairman of Liberal Youth of Sweden (LUF) West, told the newspaper Aftonbladet that the idea had actually come from a group of women inside his party. “It is important to discuss the role of men in pregnancy,” Nilsen explained, adding that the proposed system would make it clear when men are legally required to play a role in their child’s life and when they are not.

“It is important that men are honest with their intentions,” he said. “With this proposal, there is a clear legal decision.”

eliminativism

It would be necessary for men to be informed about the pregnancy before the 18th week, though that may be already implied.

Seems like a straightforward suggestion.

loliass-deactivated20160907

sweden’s fucked but this is one good thing i guess.

yog-froggoth

even a broken clock

judgingeternity

I’m all for this. People often get squirly when the idea of an “on paper abortion” is brought up as if men are asking for control over a women’s body, but it’s rather disingenuous to act like the man isn’t influencing things simply by existing. A women may be more likely to choose giving birth then abortion just because she knows she can take the guy to court for his wages, so she’s already influenced. This would save the guy grief, and it would allow women to finally do that whole autonomy thing they’ve been talking about for years but just haven’t gotten around to. I mean, it’s that or consider “Fathers Rights Groups” which would be nice as well.

thinksquad-deactivated20190405

The idea has not been popular.

Sweden may well have among the most accepting views of abortion in the world — one recent poll found that 84 percent of the country supports awoman’s right to have an abortion whenever she wants one. Yet a proposal from a Swedish group to offer men the right to a “legal abortion” of an unborn child has not been met with enthusiasm.

The idea, proposed by a regional branch of the youth wing of the centrist Liberal Party, would allow a potential father to legally abdicate his responsibility toward the child up to the 18th week of a woman’s pregnancy. The man would lose any rights to visit the child but also would not pay any child support he may otherwise be required to contribute.

Marcus Nilsen, chairman of Liberal Youth of Sweden (LUF) West, told the newspaper Aftonbladet that the idea had actually come from a group of women inside his party. “It is important to discuss the role of men in pregnancy,” Nilsen explained, adding that the proposed system would make it clear when men are legally required to play a role in their child’s life and when they are not.

“It is important that men are honest with their intentions,” he said. “With this proposal, there is a clear legal decision.”

toast-and-repost

Friendly Reminder That...

While one of the most influential and recognizable feminists of modern day is raising $200k for herself (after raising almost $1 million already and failing to produce the content she said she would.)

The “Mysoginistic, woman-hating, patriarchal” anti feminist youtubers are putting on a fundraiser to actually help women in other countries.

Here’s the run down.

With Anita Sarkeesian’s fundraiser, the money goes to:

Videos.

That is all that will happen to help women with $200k.

Wtih Amazing Atheist’s fundraiser here The money goes to:

Advancing the rights of adolescent girls

Promoting comprehensive sexual education

Ending child marriages and forced marriages

Ensuring safe and legal abortions

In places like Africa, India and Asia.

Isn’t it funny how anti-feminists are doing more to help women than a feminist icon?

A bit ironic isn’t it.

But oh well, donate if you can. I’ve put in $10 and would appreciate others doing the same.

Oh, and feminist, before you decide to donate to Anita, remember, she did not deliver on her last project which she raised $159k for it (initially only asking for $6k)

thelookingglassalice

rhube

BABIES!!!

roachpatrol

so the best thing about this is that bobcats, like just about every feline besides lions and domestic cats, are pretty solitary. they don’t really have friends. they aren’t really equipped to make friends.

domestic cats, on the other hand, do know how to make friends. they are friendly to the point that lots of feral cats live in colonies— the females hang out together, even raise kids together, and the males like to spend nonsexual time with their baby mommas. they groom each other, play around, and have a particular tail position to signal to one another— straight up with the tip curled— that they’re friendly and happy to see each other. cats learned how to be chill with each other in order to take full advantage of human food sources: an ancient granary supplies enough rats for a lot of cats, as does a modern lady with a big bag of frisky bits, so it would be a waste of time and energy for any one cat to try and stake the entire foodsource out for exclusive use. less fighting means more eating and resting which means a longer, nicer life and a lot more kittens.

so this stray cat, she obviously has no colony if she’s wandering around and sneaking into zoo enclosures, so she’s like ‘hey! there’s food here! what up, other cat, let’s be friends, let’s be friends and share that food’. and the bobcat is like ‘??????’ because actually wild cats are pretty cautious about initiating hostilities and anything new and aggressive makes them very worried. and the domestic cat is like ‘haha cool, ok, we’re friends now, big guy. no problems.’ and the bobcat is like ‘????? well…?? ok?’ and then they are friends.

the super interesting thing about most wild cat species is they don’t really have the capacity to make friends on their own, especially outside of sibling bonds, but, if someone comes along and does all the friend-making themselves, they’ll totally roll with it. zoo cats can get really attached to their caregivers— or, in this case, a very confident little calico demonstrating exactly why her species has been so darn successful over the last nine thousand years .

so anyway that is the best thing: bobcats are not equipped to make friends, but luckily for this bobcat this homeless lady did not give any shits and made friends anyway. and now they are both happy.

reaj3asa

#THE FACT THAT THE KEY TO DOMESTIC CAT’S SUCCESS IS THAT THEY LEARNED #THE MEANING OF FRIENDSHIP #IS A FUCKING HOOT

mishacoliins

!!!!!!

staraptor

kraftpunkd-blog

What she says: ferelden is soggy and brown and smells like dog

What she means: im an orlesian dont pay attention to me hon hon baguette white spire val royeaux

jaeyoonsf9

@buzzfeed which is it

kingdomheartstwo-deactivated201

you can tell the first generation of weeaboos are starting to make cartoons. you can just tell.

kingdomheartstwo-deactivated201

kasukasukasumisty

#someone please add a screenshot of lumpy space prince with his shoujo eyes

TAWOG bonus

voideddragon

dont forget

cinnabarlab

And dont get me started on

asyipyip

poorrichardsnews

Galileo anyone? Justice Dept. considered prosecuting those who question government climate narrative

This should terrify every single American, regardless of political affiliation.

read the rest

welsh58-blog

The climate change con, must be maintained at all cost! They realize people are waking up to the deceit of climate change advocates, and by this farcical trumped up prosecution charges shows Barry O & his UN masters want the lie maintained at all cost!

oceanchilled

Ok before I start losing brain cells let’s get this out of the way. There’s no such thing as the “climate change narrative” or “climate change con” bc it’s not a narrative or a con. Climate change is actually happening, and I’d be more than happy to give you a basic ecological rundown of why carbon emissions and atmospheric carbon levels are problem that isn’t going to go away anytime soon. As for why carbon relates to climate change, CO2 and many other gases produced by human activity are heat trapping gases. Meaning they trap excess heat in the atmosphere, and limit the Earth’s ability to release heat. Now a build up of carbon in the atmosphere is nothing new, in fact it’s part of the carbon cycle and the natural transition between carbon sinks and pools. The problem arises when we start burning a huge amount of fossil fuels, which are huge carbon sinks, meaning they hold a lot of carbon within them. Now usually this carbon stays underground and goes through the carbon cycle normally and slowly but when you burn them all that carbon is suddenly released into the atmosphere prematurely. At this point in time humans have released huge amounts of carbon into the atmosphere (along with other heat trapping gases) and have majorly impacted the greenhouse effect heat trapping gases have on the Earth. More heat trapping gases in the atmosphere means more heat absorbed and retained by the Earth, which overtakes the amount of heat the Earth releases. This means the Earth is getting hotter and hotter and can’t release enough heat fast enough to to keep avg planetwide temps from increasing. Over course this happens slowly and seems small. A couple degree change may not seem like a big deal but think about ice. Ice melts at any temp greater than 0 C or 32 F meaning a one degree change in say, the attic which is made up of mostly ice will have a severe impact on that ecosystem since the entire ecosystem had evolved around the presence of freezing temperatures and the presence of ice. And that’s just one simple example. I could go into ocean acidification too but that’s a lot and it’s too late at night. So my point is there are thousands of peer reviewed scientific research papers published by reputable and reliable scientfic journals that prove climate change is real and that humans are literally causing major and irreversible disturbances to the global ecosystem but by all means please continue believing that climate change is a lie.

poorrichardsnews

It is the epitome of arrogance for one to claim to even remotely understand the infinitely complex dynamics of the Earth’s climate. Be that as it may… The Catholic Church and political leaders were *CERTAIN* that the Earth was the center of the universe. And they, with clear consciences, punished Galileo and demanded he recant his dissent.

diaryofadepressedmisogynist

The difference is that the Catholic Church and political leaders of the time were not scientists and, just like climate change deniers, refused to look at the evidence.

matt-ruins-your-shit

Nice special pleading fallacy, there is no difference. The thing about evidence is its never a matter of I have it and you don’t. It’s a matter of whose evidence is best and most compelling, and part of good science is allowing dissent to question narratives and offer new or better evidence. Anytime a scientists says a competing hypothesis is just “denial” of their hypothesis they are being unscientific. The same way anyone who says “the science is settled” is being unscientific, science doesn’t work that way…propaganda does.

You are aware that many early scientists were also christians, so it wasn’t a matter of the church not listening to science. The two were one in the same for the most part, it was a christian who invented the very scientific method we use today for fucks sake.

The church had their evidence and their scientists just the same, who probably said something along the lines of what morons like you are saying. I bet they even called Galileo a geocentrism denier. They had staked their claim on one scientific theory (geocentrism). Up until Galileo all the evidence had supported a geocentric universe…until he came along and said here is better evidence of something else (heliocentrism). In the same way today our political leaders have staked themselves on the side of a scientific theory and are threatening those who suggest otherwise.

Speaking of evidence if the evidence is so one sided why are there climate scientists saying that better methods for measuring global temperature data that detect no major heating (satellites) are being ignored in favour of faulty and susceptible low tech methods which do show heating trends. I’ll tell you why…because new better evidence is being ignored for the sake of the narrative that the political and scientific establishment has already placed their bets on. Just like the catholic church and the scientific establishment did in Galileo’s day.

switch-up-snowfox

personally, i just don’t fucking know if climate change is going on, though i would like us to take steps to prevent it if it is happening. who knows, maybe we’ll find a way to keep our quality of life or improve it while keeping things environmentally friendly.

but prosecuting those who disbelieve? christ, i thought this was america.

furlockhound-inactive-moved-dea

Nice deceptive presentation of a statement that’s right on your page.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch testified Wednesday that the Justice Department has “discussed” taking civil legal action against the fossil fuel industry for “denying” the “threat of carbon emissions” when it comes to climate change.

During Lynch’s testimony at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said that he believes there are similarities between the tobacco industry denying scientific studies showing the dangers of using tobacco and companies within the fossil fuel industry denying studies allegedly showing the threat of carbon emissions.

He went on to point out that under President Bill Clinton, the Justice Department brought and won a civil case against the tobacco industry, while the Obama administration has “done nothing” so far with regard to the fossil fuel industry.

They didn’t discuss going after random people for denying climate changes, they discussed going after the the oil companies for behavior that becomes unethical and damaging to the environment in light of the evidence.

This is no differnt that when they forced tobacco companies to acknowledge the dangers of their product and post proper warnings.

I swear right-wing Tumblr is just as reactionary and full of bullshit as left-wing Tumblr now.