Crying about dogs

Emmett. 26, trans, queer, white social worker [he/him or they/them pronouns] Here you will find social justice, cute animals, and queers. fan blog: allyourfavsaretrans

Last update
2020-07-14 03:33:13

    I am currently studying memes academically. I thought you might enjoy the current proposed “ages” of internet memes

    OP please post the link to the academic journal or the paper when your research gets published

    One of my favourite things about this taxonomy, and I say this utterly sincerely, is how it completely omits that there were any pre-Advice Animal memes (of which the most popular were lolcats, but fake inspirational posters also had a moment and pseudo rules/laws like Rule 34 and Godwin’s Law can arguably be considered memes as well). (Godwin wrote an article about mimetic engineering in 1994 and it’s unnervingly prescient, I’m just saying.)

    The meta point that this omission makes is that each generation of internet residents remakes the concept of a meme itself, considering memes that were around when they first encountered memes to be “Golden Age”, memes when they started making memes themselves to be “Silver Age”, and memes when another generation had started taking up the mantle of memedom to be degenerate. (And of course, entirely forgetting about even earlier generations of meme, unless you write a book about it and end up digging up faxlore or something. *whistles*) 

    In other words, yes, the meme of memes is itself a meme. 

    Where the frick does All Your Base fall then

    From the article linked above: “If Wilhoit’s principle is true — and I think it is — then their [conservatives’] behavior is not inconsistent in itself nor is it inconsistent with their core principle: “There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

    This is why conservatives despise the CFPB and Black Lives Matter and #MeToo and the 14th Amendment and the Voting Rights Act and the Geneva Conventions. All of those things, in their view, make the fundamental error of attempting to require the law to protect out-groups or — even worse — of attempting to require the law to bind in-groups. The distinction between those groups, and the “proper” respective meaning of the law to each, is all that conservatism cares to conserve.

    This, this is exactly why I firmly believe that conservatives are just facists with a different name.

    pres. trump sent federal troops into portland to squash the protests and they shot someone in the head with an impact round last night and shattered his skull. his blood is still on the sidewalk outside the federal courthouse. they are not like local cops and they are NOT fucking around. they carry ARs with live ammo and they are merciless. i am very sincerely scared that federal forces are going to instigate a kent state type situation by killing protesters as an example sometime between now & november and i am very scared it’s going to be here

    Video of the protester who was shot being carried away by medics while bleeding everywhere (obvious TW). He is alive but was in critical condition when he arrived at the hospital & needed extensive facial + skull reconstruction surgery. At the time they shot him he was standing on the sidewalk with both hands holding a boombox above his head

    Video of a federal officer kneeling on someone while he has a seizure; they did not allow medics to help him. There is word that this person may have died but afaik that is still unconfirmed

    Video of federal officers chasing & assaulting medics tending to an unresponsive protester

    Video of 15 feds forcibly arresting a disabled trans person and taking away their service dog
    for the crime of writing on the federally owned sidewalk in washable sidewalk chalk

    Full live tweet thread of the night (7/11/20) with a lot more video footage, especially of the absolutely ludicrous amounts of tear gas they used


    sorry for the long post—i am not sure how much national coverage this is getting and i really want people to know what’s going on here. they are behaving like an occupying army & treating citizens like enemy combatants

    hey so, as a man who works with other men, here’s a quick relationship tip: if he doesn’t much like cats, that might be just a personal preference. if he hates cats, if he tells you he hates cats as soon as he hears that you have a cat and love your cat, he’s an asshole. he’s telling on himself.  

    every guy i’ve ever worked with that makes a point of telling me how much he hates cats as soon as i mention that i have a cat and love my cat, is always someone who is regularly cruel for fun and who laughs in the breakroom about the mean things they do for fun to their girlfriends and children. 


    I wish I could articulate all the ways this makes sense and why it makes sense and stuff but it’s just like… something something misogyny something something resentment of creatures that don’t need you and don’t hang on your attention and approval all their lives.

    Honestly, if a guy’s response to you telling them about anything you love— especially a pet— is to immediately start talking about how vehemently they hate it, then that’s a red flag.

    “Oh, I don’t like cats/dogs/rugby, personally” is fine. A genuine phobia— “oh, I can’t stand cats, ever since I was scratched by one as a child"— is fine (although it’s also a sign that you might not be well-suited to each other as a couple, unless you’re willing to give up cats for good or he’s willing to go to therapy). “Oh I fucking hate cats so much, they’re horrible beasts” is weird, rude, and shows a significant lack of consideration for your feelings.

    This is a guy who doesn’t care about what you love (you don’t have to love everything your partner loves, but you should care that they love it) and whose response to you having a different opinion to him— no matter how minor the issue is— is to try and override it.

    Absolutely get out of there.

    It also feels like a weird variant of negging. Like, you like something, they loudly proclaim how much they hate it, and that puts you in a position to apologize/peddle back for liking the thing for their benefit. 

    cats are incredibly capable of asserting their boundaries and they require you to actively communicate with them in order to foster a relationship with you. you can’t just pet any cat anywhere, for instance–you have to get to know the cat and find out where it is comfortable being touched, what it likes, what makes it happy. some cats won’t immediately open up to you and require small rituals of trust in order for them to realize you are safe and worth being near. cats speak with body language, but they speak LOUDLY about what they do and don’t like. they have a reputation for being “difficult” because they assert their boundaries by nature and rarely partake in anything that makes them uncomfortable. so, yes, while someone denouncing anything you love right after you’ve expressed joy about it is a red flag, this makes sense. there are always going to be exceptions, but cruel/controlling men and cats definitely seem like a pretty terrible mix.


    You know what? This actually isn’t funny at all because this really does happen. Baby boomers can’t afford to retire; that’s a big part of why millennials can’t find jobs in their fields. And if they lose their jobs (which can mean a variety of things, including their companies finding an excuse to fire them so they don’t have to pay anything for their retirement, which happened to my uncle and 5 people he worked with over one year), they aren’t as desirable because they’re retirement-age. The world has changed a lot since they got jobs they thought were supposed to be secure, and now their old strategies that used to work for finding a job don’t work anymore and they don’t know what does work. So a lot are desperate; I recently talked to a woman who had to be in at least her mid-60s who was begging on a street corner because she was replaced by a younger person and lost her job of 18 years, and it’s not the first time I’ve heard a story like that. A lot of people who were never rich to begin with lost a lot in the 2008 financial crisis and never fully recovered. Baby boomers didn’t all just magically become financially secure as they got older.

    This generation war bullshit is 100% manufactured to keep our anger misdirected. It’s not baby boomers screwing over millennials. It’s rich capitalists of every living generation screwing over baby boomers, their parents, gen x-ers, millennials, and gen z-ers all at once and all in different ways. And if we collectively realize that we’re not enemies and that we actually have a common cause with common enemies, it’ll be really bad for the people doing this to us, which is why they’re pushing the generation war thing so hard.

    ^ wisdom on Tumblr. That’s rare.


    <>This generation war bullshit is 100% manufactured to keep our anger misdirected. It’s not baby boomers screwing over millennials. It’s rich capitalists of every living generation screwing over baby boomers, their parents, gen x-ers, millennials, and gen z-ers all at once and all in different ways.

    Bolding and underlining the really important bits.

    You heard of divide and conquer used in imperialistic wars, now get ready for D&C used against your own peoole.