24. Used to be thetiredcuddler
24. Used to be thetiredcuddler
You can’t protest for a day. You can’t protest for a weekend. You can’t March. You gotta protest all year. You gotta burn, loot, and riot. They have the resources to wait out your little weekend March. We have got to start taking our ques from the civil rights movement. This is a marathon not sprint.
No one I know has had the same experience as me getting on hrt and honestly it's a damn shame
me, mentally bracing myself for months, if not years of psychological evaluation: "So I think I might be trans?"
doc: "cool cool cool cool"
doc: "so... do you wanna start estrogen today or...?"
This is the blessed post of ungatekeeping. Reblog this to never again have to barter with a medical professional regarding treatment of your mental or physical health.
if you are in the united states, this is a map of every us clinic which practices the informed-consent model of hrt; as you can see, there’s a fair amount, although great plains/basin and range/deep south coverage is lacking. i went to the san diego family health center after discovering that the in-house process covered by my insurance would take a long enough time and involve enough gatekeeping (especially considering my personal approach to gender and transition) that there was no chance of my getting on testosterone through them before i left the country, and the fhc not only got me fully processed and on hrt within a month but gave me an 80% discount. this is to say that even if your insurance doesn’t cover your nearest informed-consent clinic, or you haven’t got insurance, it’s still worth investigating.
Informed Consent is absolutely the way to go if you have the option - even if you have to go some distance to make it happen. I’m more than happy with the course of my transition in terms of response from medical staff and clinicians (if not the actual effects of HRT so far... :-| ). If you’re considering transitioning medically, please, please, please do yourself a favor and check Erin’s Informed Consent map to see if there’s a clinic that does IC HRT in your local area.
I'm generally of the opinion that if your film requires so much cgi that your actors are performing against nothing but green screens, maybe you should just be making an animated film instead. Because you're basically already making one anyway.
It’s often been remarked that Spider-Man’s schtick wouldn’t work nearly so well if he didn’t live in a town with so many tall buildings, but consider: how well would Batman’s “I am the night” routine work if he was operating out of a normal city where people actually live, rather than a perpetually twilit urban hellscape that looks like the Art Deco movement had a one-night stand with Soviet Brutalism in a wrought-iron-and-gargoyle factory?
That is my favorite description of the Batman aesthetic ever.
OMDFG that’s a perfect description.
Imagine Spiderman ballooning in wide open areas. No, sorry, can’t get to that crime, its against the prevailing wind.
Also, Batman brooding on top of a Wafflehouse.
Batman: God, this stupid city with its sufficient lighting and lack of crumbling infrastructure to shoot grappling hooks into
Superman: Everyone for miles has lead poisoning, I’ve spent the entire night stopping crossword puzzle museum robberies and heists at the Second National Bank of Gotham on the corner of second street and second avenue, and earlier the wall of…clouds? smog?…cleared up for a minute and I’m pretty sure the sky was literally blood red
I HATE METROPOLIS FUCK EVERYONE WHO LIVES THERE i’m not super into gotham IT IS THE WORST PLACE ON EARTH AND I HOPE IT BLOWS UPWHY DO THESE PEOPLE LIKE THE SUN SO MUCH it’s kinda gloomy a lil bit of a bummer WHY THE FUCK DOES CLARK WANNA DO THIS HOUSE SWAP THING i saw a reality tv show and i was like bruce we gotta try this
#so did they miss the part where gatsby ends up floating dead in a pool and all the miserable deaths in wuthering heights#or did they miss that because there weren’t any chapters titled In Which The Sinners Are Punished For Their Errors#like. even if you require explicit moral instruction from literature it’s pretty hard to miss the comeuppance in those.
“What I assume my teachers were trying to teach me”
Huck Finn is about a white Southern boy who was raised to believe that freeing slaves is a sin that would send you directly to hell who forges a familial bond with a runaway slave and chooses to free him and thereby in his mind lose his salvation because he refuses to believe that his best friend and surrogate father is less of a man just because he’s black. Yes it features what we now consider racial slurs but this is a book written only 20 years after people were literally fighting to be allowed to keep other human beings as property, we cannot expect people from the 1880s to exactly conform with the social mores of 2020, and more to the point if we ourselves had been raised during that time period there’s very little doubt that we would also hold most if not all of the prevalent views of the time because actual history isn’t like period novels written now where the heroes are perfect 21st century social justice crusaders and the villains are all as racist and sexist as humanly possible. Change happens slowly and ignoring the radical statement that we’re all human beings that Twain wrote at a time when segregation and racial tensions were still hugely prevalent just because he wrote using the language of his time period is short-sighted and foolhardy to the highest degree.
I’m really kind of alarmed at the rise in the past few years of the “and we do condemn! wholeheartedly!” discourse around historical figures. it seems like people have somehow boomeranged between “morals were different in the past, therefore nobody in the past can ever be held accountable for ANY wrongs” to “morals are universal and timeless, and anything done wrong by today’s standards in the past is ABSOLUTELY unforgiveable” so completely, because social media 2.0 is profoundly allergic to nuance
please try this on for size:
there have always been, in past times as today, a range of people in every society, some of whom were even then fighting for a more just and compassionate accord with their fellow man and some of whom let their greeds and hatreds rule them to the worst allowable excesses. the goal of classics and history education is to teach you enough context to discern between the two, not only in the past but in the present
My mind just boggles at the “There’s Racism In That Book” argument. Yes, there is racism in that book, because that book is ABOUT RACISM. The message is that it is BAD.
My high school English teacher, who was a viciously brilliant woman, used to say that when people banned Huck Finn they said it was about the language, but it was really the message they were trying to ban, the subversive deconstruction of (religious) authority and white supremacy.
Huckleberry Finn can actually be seen as a powerful case study in trying to do social justice when you have absolutely no tools for it, right down to vocabulary. And in that respect, it’s a heroic tale, because Huck—with absolutely no good examples besides Jim, who he has been taught to see as subhuman, with no guidance, with everyone telling him that doing the right thing will literally damn him, with a vocabulary that’s full of hate speech—he turns around and says, “I’m not going to do it. I’m not going to participate in this system. If that means I go to Hell, so be it. Going to Hell now.”
(I used to read a blogger who insisted that “All right, I’ll go to Hell,” from Huckleberry Finn is the most pure and perfect prayer in the canon of American literature. Meaning, as I understand it, that the decision to do the right thing in the face of eternal damnation is the most holy decision one can make, and if God Himself is not proud of the poor mixed-up kid, then God Himself is not worth much more than a “Get thee behind me,” and the rest of us should be lining up to go to Hell too. Worth noting that this person identified as an evangelical Christian, not because he was in line with what current American evangelicals believe, but because “they can change their name, I’m not changing mine.” Interesting guy. Sorry for the long parenthetical.)
Anyway, the point of Huck Finn, as far as I can tell, is that you can still choose to do good in utter darkness, with no guidance and no help and none of the right words.
And when you put it like that, it’s no wonder that a lot of people on Tumblr—people who prioritize words over every other form of social justice—find it threatening and hard to comprehend.
This is why it’s important to learn how to analyze media, a skill we are apparently losing.
While Huck Finn, for example, absolutely and obviously carries a moral message, not all stories do, because not every story is supposed to teach you something, nor will every story hold your hand and gently walk you to an easy conclusion.
I am so frustrated by the “if media portrays something, it’s saying it’s ok” and “if you enjoy a piece of medoa which portrays something negative, then you’re bad” mentality. Just pls. Stop. That’s not how stories work.
“I used to read a blogger who insisted that “All right, I’ll go to Hell,” from Huckleberry Finn is the most pure and perfect prayer in the canon of American literature. Meaning, as I understand it, that the decision to do the right thing in the face of eternal damnation is the most holy decision one can make, and if God Himself is not proud of the poor mixed-up kid, then God Himself is not worth much more than a “Get thee behind me,” and the rest of us should be lining up to go to Hell too.”
This right here.
If “you should be willing to sacrifice everything, including your soul, to protect your friends when everyone around wants your help hurting them” stops becoming a moral lesson because someone says the n-word, I think people are… a little TOO impressed with the power of hate speech.
Hate speech is a terrible thing, but it’s not witchcraft. It has the power we grant to it.
If you want to say “I know what the point was, but I couldn’t get past seeing that word typed out,” feel free, but please don’t say “typing that word out nullifies the point,” as that is not how anything works.
what I genuinely CANNOT comprehend is how adults find it remotely acceptable to use the "I'm the earning member" / "I pay the rent" / "this is my house" argument towards children and actively encourage it but when used towards a non earning spouse it's acknowledged as being abusive? So you admit that you don't see your children as autonomous individuals with basic human rights?
"you can't wear that in my house. you can become an earning member and buy a house and do whatever you want there" directed towards a child is okay but directed towards, for example, a homemaker wife, is abuse? make it make sense how the former ISN'T?
Why tf does someone need to be over 18 to have basic body autonomy? Why tf does a person need to be an earning member to be considered as a person having inherent worth/dignity/for their word to be taken into consideration (at the very least)?
I have witnessed leftists who believe in prisoners rights justifying spanking and I don't understand. If you can understand that people in power hitting incarcerated people to "correct" them is a violation of human rights and an abuse of authority, how do you not understand the same logic when it comes to parents and children?
People who complain about power and abuse of power rarely acknowledge one of the most primary forms of abuse of power - against children. And that's just hypocrisy at its finest.
yknow when a cat is sniffing your face really intensely and it feels like they're deciding whether or not to let you live