Claire Keane

Love Begins
h
wallacepolsom
No title available
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ

roma★
ojovivo
trying on a metaphor
Monterey Bay Aquarium
Mike Driver
Acquired Stardust
d e v o n

No title available
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸
Keni
YOU ARE THE REASON
Game of Thrones Daily
art blog(derogatory)

祝日 / Permanent Vacation

seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from South Africa
seen from Malaysia

seen from Malaysia
seen from Poland
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from Norway
seen from Kazakhstan
seen from Netherlands

seen from United Kingdom
seen from Canada

seen from Canada
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
@tiredshadowscale
As someone who has mispronounced so many words because I never actually heard them. I appreciate this post
Gentlemen, enjoy
Can women be twinks? Can men be butch? Instead of asking these incredibly niche questions ask yourself this, if they weren't allowed to do so, who would you have enforcing that ruling? and then, I hope this kind of re-framing opens your eyes about how silly that would be, to enforce as such. But really, this is what they mean when they say "kill the cop in your head." What good does it do you to try and police people more?
hot take but I think the "we're only talking about people who identify as queer when we talk about the queer community" thing was and is one of the worst arguments in defense of the word.
I am talking about you when I say "the queer community", and "queer people", and "queer studies". I'm describing a thing that a large group of people have in common, and you share that thing in common. Your individual comfort with the word doesn't change the definition of it.
I'm sorry you don't like that word. You don't ever have to call yourself that, and you don't have to like it, and I won't ever call you that if you don't want me to.
What I am going to do, however, is decide what language I use based on A) how inclusive it is, and B) how well it communicates my point to the relevant audience.
"Inclusive" here is an important criteria; this refers to the number of people who should be included, that are included, ideally without some kind of weird hierarchy (like we see in "LGBT+" and variations). The technical definition is what we're talking about here- putting personal comfort aside, could the word "queer" describe you?
There will always be someone who doesn't like a particular word for themselves- even if it could apply. Lots of people don't like "LGBT+" (I don't really), even if it technically applies to them. You're not more important than they are.
You can identify one way on a personal level, and still understand that when we're discussing the larger community of people and the histories attached to it, you're included in that- even if you don't personally identify with the specific word we're using. Your story, your voice, and your presence matters.
Y'all need to learn to distinguish "broad term for an experience I share with others" from "personal identity label I use to describe my individual experience to others". ASAP.
Cool, then when i say LGBTQ+ instead of queer, you can't opt out when i say that. I am describing a thing that a large group of people have in common, and your discomfort with that label doesn't exclude you from that. And guess what, it's even more inclusive than queer because it has queer in the acronym, AND includes other people who don't identify with a slur.
LGBTQ+ also doesn't have a hierarchy. IDK where you got that from or what weird projection thing you're doing, but it is just a collection of identities that work together to make a common goal. It's a list. A collection of identities. The people who make it a hierarchy are usually bigots who don't care about the community as a whole. And guess what? You can find the EXACT same thing from people who call themselves queer. Only this time, it's "i have more labels than you, so I'm more oppressed + can speak over your experiences." I've seen that CONSTANTLY
You can't tell us "your voice, your presence, and your story matters" all while calling us a slur we don't reclaim. You can't tell us that this specific slur is more inclusive and tell us to "get over ourselves." You can;t say that and then freak out when we tell you that you are an asshole for not respecting the one boundary we put out. That's not how that shit works, and frankly, it shows that people like you are ignorant and cruel.
Get the fuck over yourself, and let go of your attachment to your emotional support slur.
Yeah, thanks, I am included in "LGBTQ+"!
Practically speaking, however, it's not the best word to use for the community at large. That's why it generally isn't. It's a mouthful, there are a ton of variations that there is no good consensus on appropriate use of, and the acronym itself has a history of rearrangement in order to "fix" the hierarchy widely considered inherent to the order of letters (the acronym started as "GL" until lesbians fought to put their letter first, for example).
Practically speaking, it isn't all-inclusive. People frequently leave certain letters out to indicate who they do and do not consider Queer Enough. "Q" is frequently changed to "questioning" to avoid including all queer people. "LGBT", or even "LGB", is frequently used in order to indicate that nobody else is welcome, and an entire movement exists for the express purpose of removing trans people from the acronym entirely ("drop the T").
There isn't widespread consensus on who is and is not included, and setting those parameters is a clunky conversation to have, especially when you need to do it every single time you begin a study, write proposals, pitch it, search for subjects, explain the premise to subjects, write notes and papers and do evaluations and check ins as you conduct it, and write about the study afterwards. Not to mention all the opportunities for extremely basic misunderstandings along the way.
Queer doesn't have this problem; it's easy to say, it's all-inclusive, and any bickering about who "counts" is significantly harder to do under a term that isn't just a definition turned into an infinite acronym, with a "who must always be included" shortlist and a "who its okay to just kind of suggest might be there, but will probably need to be listed specifically for the sake of clarity later" much longer list. In academic spaces, the ambiguity of "queer" to mean "anyone who doesn't really fit society's standards of gender and orientation" serves the purpose of keeping conversations on track from the get go.
"Don't call me a slur" doesn't really work as an argument here, either. "LGBTQ+" (and variations) includes slurs, and there are and will always be people who do not, cannot, personally identify with certain terms- including the acronym itself ("LGBPRQHFUEJwhatever"). Those people do not matter less than you do.
The solution is to respect their individual wishes to not be called those words. The solution is not to shoot down every word for every person that makes anyone at all uncomfortable, therefore trapping us in a perpetual cycle of bickering over hyperspecific word choice & inventing new words for bigots to ruin, then moving on and bickering again, before anyone is allowed to have a conversation about anything meaningful.
"Queer" is the word we have already settled on. We've been settled on it for decades. You do not have to describe yourself that way, and if there's widespread agreement that there's a functionally better term to use, then sure, whatever 🤷♂️ my point here is just that there's a separation between what you identify as personally, and what groups you belong to socially.
"It doesn't include everyone" is a nothing argument. Yes it does. "TIF" also includes me, as a trans man; the reason we don't use it is because there are better terms, it's not widely known, and it's confusing and counterintuitive in construction. We also moved on from "FTM" to "trans man" for similar reasons. I'm still "FTM" in conversations about it, though, even though I prefer not to be called that personally.
There's a practical element here that you are apparently refusing to see, and it's counterproductive to the conversation everyone else is trying to have.
Out of all the cool stuff that mythbusters ever shot on high speed camera, shooting a soccer ball at 60mph out of a truck traveling 60mph is one of my favorites
Just look at it. It is the most perfect visual representation of Newton’s 2nd law of physics I’ve ever seen. The ball, which was shot out of a CANNON, drops straight down. Two equal and opposite velocities completely canceling each other out, leaving the soccer ball to drop to the earth with a net velocity of 0. Sir issac newton would be proud to tears of this gif.
And yet this “myth” is nothing more than basic physics at work. A 10 year old with an interest in science could have told us this is possible. 60mph in one direction minus 60mph the exact opposite direction is 0. Basic.
But what makes this so frieken cool is the fact that they went through all the trouble to actually demonstrate the invisible laws that govern the way our universe works. To get this shot both the soccer ball and the truck had to be moving at the exact same speed. Real world variables make that extremely difficult to pull off. It took them hundreds of attempts to get it right. They went through all that trouble to “prove” something we have known as fact for hundreds of years. And we get this amazing gif to watch as a result.
Mythbusters is incredible. Science is incredible. And the fact that this experiment in physics can be used in science classes for years and years to come to help children learn about physics is incredible.
"hell yeah!!! 196 subreddit is back open!!! now we can all go back to reddi-"
BUDDY you're a BOY you're a BIG BIG BOY you're a BIG BIG BIG BIG BIG BIG BOY you got mud on your face you BIG BIG BOY kicking your can all over the place singing WEE wee WEE wee WEE wee WEE wee
nothing will ever be funnier to me than the 30-50 feral hogs joke phase, I think about it at least once a week
Happy 30-50 feral hogs day
Messages in the soulsborne games will always be the most amusing case study of human nature to me. It's pretty much an even chance whether you'll find a helpful tip, a meme, a helpful tip (lie), or something obscene with an emote to match.
I mean, where else can you find someone pointing out an illusory wall, and then two feet later someone else's ghost points his finger directly into a dead dragon's asshole?
Over a 100???? It was just the guy in the photo a couple days ago djsjdjks
no but jokes aside this is actually really great. malicious compliance in the best way.
here's a quote from a Pink News article about this that really stuck with me:
Elia Bonci, who also spoke to la Repubblica, said: “I took courage, used my deadname and signed up for Miss Italy because fighting transphobia is intersectional and even though I’m not a trans woman, I’ve decided to fight for their rights.”
the whole point is to show how "afab" being used as a replacement for woman is fucking stupid and fundamentally incorrect and. whatever else. and it gives me hope to see the community rising up like this. solidarity and unity and peace on planet earth.
When I say I'm a trans woman, the primary word is woman. I am a woman. "Trans" in that phrase is there to give you a perspective on my lived experience, it is a courtesy.
my man saturn eatin’ fresh out of the oven without even waiting for it to cool down first
oh so they’re just saying the quiet part out loud? Good to know they’re just out and open now
That’s not the quiet part.
There’s something else, something they might not even be fully aware of themselves. The real quiet part is that if it was *their* child or *their* ectopic pregnancy they’d pull out all the stops to save their life or get their grandchild aborted. Planned Parenthood sees reactionaries and regressives all the time, and they are every bit the nightmare patients you’d imagine them to be. But the one thing all those patients have in common is that *their* abortion is *justified*, and the next week they’ll be outside the clinic again, rejoining the protestors for “killing their baby”.
It’d be one thing to have ghoulish principles, but the far-right have none at all.
When the Anti-Choice Choose By Joyce Arthur Copyright © September, 2000 Available in a French translation Available in a German translation
When I was younger and had more time to waste on the internet, and spent a lot of time in various online forums getting into arguments -- on purpose -- I made up a game I called Six Degrees of Slut.
The game (which is a variation on the well known Six Degrees of Bacon) was very simple. In any discussion of abortion, see whether you could get the other side to articulate, within six back-and-forth exchanges, some variation of The Filthy Sluts Must Be Punished. Regardless of where their argument started, the goal of the game was to get them to admit that.
I never once lost a game of Six Degrees of Slut. On a few occasions the match was inconclusive - the other person left off arguing before we reached round six - but I never lost; I never once reached six rounds of debate with a prolifer without them expressing some variation on this sentiment. But what was really remarkable to me was, a lot of times, that there was no effort involved at all -- they would blurt it out themselves, with effectively no provocation.
Scratch a prolifer, and you'll find right under the surface the conviction that The Filthy Sluts Must Be Punished. I have never once yet found an exception. Sometimes you don't even have to scratch.