@gizensha / gizensha.tumblr.com
ancient relics
These things didn’t happen that long ago!!!!!!
What is this ‘call waiting’ of which you speak? Our phone would go to engaged if we tried to dial someone on the phone and we didn’t get any notification if someone tried to phone us while we were on it.
Insulin costs like $5 to make. This is murder.
“Insulin has become so expensive…” Insulin doesn’t “become” expensive. Three pharma companies set the price: Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi. Their CEOs are: David A. Ricks ($16m/year), Lars F. Jørgensen ($3.5m/year), Olivier Brandicourt ($11.8m/year).
Buddy.
Pal.
“I’m deliberately not including [visible minority] in this setting because I don’t want to make it political” is itself a political stance.
I’m so goddamn mad that oil companies have known climate change is real for decades and did everything to stop people from acting on it. I want to burn their offices down. I want to throw their CEOs into a fucking pit. The world is being destroyed because some filthy rich fucks saw the end coming and figured making money off it was better than saving it. That’s pure evil, plain and simple.
This isn’t a conspiracy theory, this is a documented historical fact, and people’s heads should literally be rolling for it.
This video, which is a summary of that history, has been haunting me since I saw it – especially since I’m old enough to actually remember all this going down for myself:
(no human-edited captions. But since the narrator is an American Adult Man, the algorithm gets it mostly right)
I’m not saying he would win, but like….I get it
This is an interesting story because people my parents age are like “How dare he” and people my age are like “oh same”
What’s even more interesting is he’s not serious. In India there’s a culture of intense deference to parents. He believes that this is a very unhealthy way for people to live and so he’s using this court case as a way to tell people that the idea of “you must grovel in gratitude to your parents because they brought you into the world and fed and clothed you” is a bad thing and that parents have to feed and clothe you because it’s their damn job and they chose to have you.
He really gets on with his own parents and his mother has publicly voiced her support for him.
Tl;dr: This isn’t incel bullshit like the dude who’s parents evicted him last year, this is a political protest to unhealthy expectations parents have for their children even though he isn’t pressured into those expectations by his own parents.
In Irish, “December” is “Mí na Nollag” which is literally “The Month of Christmas” so I feel completely culturally justified in treating today like the beginning of one long holiday, honestly.
In scottish gaelic its ‘an Dubhlachd’ which effectively means the blackness and i feel like this is one of the fundamental differences between irish and scottish gaelic.
In Welsh it’s “Mis Rhagfyr/rhagfyr” which literally just means “foreshortening (month)” as in the days are short in this month.
Which I think is exactly halfway between the beautiful cheer of gaeilge & the existential dread of gàidhlig.
Another quick reminder since i start seeing people saying “UwU both are good” in the tags and reblogs.
Reminder : it doesn’t matter how we portray them, they are dead so like let ppl have fun
But why does it matter dude I know it’s scientifically innacurate but ppl enjoying that innacurate version doesn’t have any negative applications???? Unless dinosaurs were brought back to life and ppl misidentified them or smthn it really has only negative impact keeping ppl from having fun with the fictional lizard dinos
It makes a big difference. People who make models for museums get passed over for projects because the owners don’t want to hear that their precious Jurassic Park lizards were actually weird birds, and “the public won’t get it anyway”. It makes a feedback loop so that even when people are presented with accurate depictions of past animals, they violently reject them.
Scaly raptors are also a gift to the anti-evolution fanatics, who like to pretend that the rarity of big mainstream feathered dinosaurs is in some way indicative of conflict and confusion in the paleontology community.
Also science is constantly attacked in popular media and it’s so important we stop questioning knowledge in lieu of popularity. Facts are rarely good news but how we react can be.
i have no problem with giant lizards in works of fantasy... The problem is when things that are purported to be dinosaurs, raptors especially, which aren’t feathery nightmares of death (Not all dinosaurs were feathery nightmares of death, obviously - T-Rex was a scavenger, pleanty of plant eaters - though hippos are very aggresive plant eaters, so you know that doesn’t mean placid either, I’m mostly thinking of various types of raptors there.)
(Also, having had personal close quarters experience of both birds and lizards. Trust me, after having been snuggled by a bearded dragon (she tried to bury herself into my armpit) and attacked by a goose, a hoard of chicken sized feathery death that are pack hunters and will rip my flesh from my bones is much more terrifying than a naked version of such)
any noun can become a verb if you don’t care enough
This point is invalid unless you use an example in your sentence
I CAN SENTENCE HOW I WANT THANK
BEAUTIFUL
you see thats why i love english
I like to velociraptor around my house at 2 in the morning.
GOOD
My headache makes me want to clothesline into a wall
why do these make some semblance of sense 😨
Because brains don’t brain logically
Brains do brain logically! But when english doesn’t logic englishly, brain brains by itself to logic that english !
I hate that this makes sense
I believe this is called verbing a noun. Shakespeare was a fan.
Gay:
LGBT:
Queer:
Homosexual
Think what you want, believe what you will, but every word we have ever used to describe ourselves is coated in blood.
This means no pranks of any sort, just standard blogging.
anyways, here’s my hot comic take: if you don’t want to use a character, you don’t have to kill them off. You can just make them go do mental health stuff. Like you could say that literally any character in a superhero comic is busy because they went on a year long cruise to avoid having a mental breakdown from the stress the hero life brings and everyone would be like, “yeah, sounds legit.” and then the writer after you doesnt need to bring in some bogus reason why a cool character they want to write was actually alive this whole time. everyone wins!
Or like they could be doing charity work or something! You don’t have to kill them off!
Open their next movie with a montage of them avoiding newspapers and turning off TVs and drinking tea before they finally get back into the game
This is called “put on a bus” and I think we should bring it back in fiction instead of shocking deaths.
Quebec ban on religious symbols?
Yes, the Quebec Government is trying to do that.
I’ve posted about this several times this week all under the #quebec hashtag if you want to learn more.
To be clear, the ban is only on anyone working in or for any government agency or function. People are free to wear whatever TF they want in their private/personal lives.
I agree with this policy. Religion has no place in our governance. By removing all religious symbols from schools, hospitals, police and other public services they are removing any possible bias or appearances of preference or prevalence - in effect making sure government is purely secular as it should be.
Leveling the playing field should be championed and celebrated, not opposed. Those opposing things like this are self identifying would be tyrants.
People should have a right to express their identities however they wish and any action to prevent that is fascist and xenophobic. It’s not levelling the playing field if you’re telling Sikh men they can’t wear turbans, or Muslim women they can’t wear hijabs or Jewish people they can’t wear Kippas. These are symbols or their identity and we should all have the liberty to express ourselves however the fuck we want.
Why shouldn’t people in government funded jobs of all places be allowed to self express? If appearances make you biased, you are the problem.
Also this policy is literally illegal. It’s unconstitutional. That’s why the Quebec Government used the notwithstanding clause to overrule the Charter of Rights.
This isn’t secularism. It’s government sponsored bigotry.
It is going to lead to an increasingly dangerous climate of islamophobia and xenophobia for marginalized groups.
This is the exact opposite of a policy we should be adopting after the New Zealand Terrorist attack. This others people and creates a two tier system within the public service.
Also, like, highly doubtful any Christian symbols are going to be removed in order to fit this stupid ban.
Not to mention that the followup for Sikh men to “You can’t wear a turban at work” is “Our dress code requires short hair for men.”
At that point they either have to abandon an important tenet of their religion or quit their job.
Yeah, visible Christian symbols are optional.
Visible Sikh symbols are a requirement of the faith.
Even if equally enforced, attempts to ban visible religious symbols in Christian dominated territories aren’t ‘legislating secularism,’ they’re attempts to ban certain religions from public life. But then, doesn’t Quebec have a linguistic ban on non-French languages that ‘coincidentally’ has more of an impact on minority and endangered languages than helping ‘protect French from English’?
[ Link ]
Non-binary people in the UK are currently unable to identify on legal documentation that their gender is neither male or female. We want to apply pressure on the UK Government to allow non-binary, gender non-conforming, gender-fluid and intersex people the right to self-identify.
Many non-binary people are prevented from self-identifying in institutions such as the NHS, HMRC, and when applying for a new passport. It not only is upsetting to not be allowed to be recognised by your own government as the gender that you self-identify with, but it leaves non-binary people feeling like we are not protected or seen as a people that deserve recognition in society.
Opened: 12 February 2019
Deadline: 12 August 2019
Signatures so far: 13,902
Spreadsheet tracking signatures: here
“Nondisabled people using amenities originally designed for disabled people does nothing but improve our lives”
I feel like it shouldn’t be a hard one to figure out, but apparently it is:
If an resource designed to cater to disability is limited, then don’t use it if you’re not disabled - like the limited number of disabled parking spaces or disabled toilets; if you use one, then someone who needs that resource won’t have access.
But if a resource is not limited, then more use will encourage more production. So use it! Buy it! Gluten free food became cheaper and more widely available after it became a fad diet, and now it’s easier for coeliacs to buy the food they need. Stim toys like fidget cubes became widely available and common use when they became a fad.
The less niche something is and the more commonly used something is, the easier it will become to obtain.
This! I try look through notes on any accessible product that is made by a niche company and any able bodied people saying “wow I would love this- I’m just so lazy and like getting dressed after an all nighter man this would be great” or whatever and just please buy it! Many “as seen on tv” items are promoted the way they are to appeal to a wider audience to make the product affordable to those who need it. When it’s a niche product produced by a company, you always pay more for niche products. This is why petites cost as much or more than plus sized clothes in western society but less in Asian countries where shorter people are more common. I often wear kids clothes (usually a boys L or XL) so I don’t have to shorten everything, unless I get lucky in a thrift store as petites cost so much more. A lot of people assume plus sized clothes cost more because more material is used, which is part of it, but a very small amount resulting in only $1-2 price difference max in production costs. In actuality the major reason has to do with niche markets. If grunge came back into fashion, standard sizes would be larger by default and plus sized clothes would become cheaper, because there is a higher demand for those sizes (as this has been sitting in drafts this is actually happening- grunge fashion is making a come back).
.
Most retail pricing is generally a 300% increase from the wholesale cost the company pays to a company overseas to make it. The more items ordered at once, the lower the final cost to the customer. This means for things meant to help disabled people, something becoming a fad and something everyone MUST HAVE is the best thing can happen. It can cut the price down enough disabled people who couldn’t afford a product (like the clothes made specifically for amputees and movement disorders) because it’s like $150 for a pair of pants and we are on limited income. If everyone wants it just to “be lazy and not have to fumble with buttons” then discount brands start making it too (like Target annoucing an upcoming accessible line) and then it’s only like $25 for a pair of accessible pants. This is a good thing!
.
So yes, all able bodied people who want that weighted blanket, spinner, magnetic button clothes, snuggies, etc- get it! Not only are you not appropriatating autistic or disabled culture but you are making products meant for these people actually accessible to them by making them more affordable. I also wanna say as someone who is both physically disabled and autistic, it’s also completely ok for non-autistic people to if they feel the urge flap or rock or carry a stuffed animal around. Normalizing stimming helps us, because we feel less embarrassed stimming in public. I trained myself for years not to flap or rock… but it felt so uncomfortable and self conscious about it. I still am a bit. Non-autistic people stimming out of boredom or anxiety or whatever make me less self conscious about stimming in public when I need to.
People wanna dress as handmaids because they can’t get birth control…. Well, I might dress up as a Wife or Aunt and protest 3rd trimester abortions. There are a lot of couples that want kids but are infertile. I’m not saying have babies for them but if you’re that late in the game, finish it and let the child live! Even IF the mother is physically or mentally having issues there is NO reason a perfectly viable child should die!
Gee golly gosh, how pro life of you to advocate that pregnant people should die instead of aborting pregnancies! You’re just bursting at the seams with pro life compassion!
Third trimester abortions don’t happen for fun, you doorknob.
I really think you missed the point of the Handmaid’s Tale. Like, by a lot.
I never said that. In fact, we have the same goal! Healthy women! But…. Why can’t the baby live too? No one said mother must die. This was a law to a problem that never needed fixing. Before it, if any mother had a medical issue at any time during the pregnancy they could say, “yes doctor save my life.” Then the doctor would delivery via C-section or induction and then if while the mother was worked on, the baby was as well if they had troubles. BOTH LIVE! What this law does though is allow the mother to want to be saved, but then she could just say, “Oh well I never wanted them so just abort.” Then two things will happen either the baby is killed and cut and sucked up with a hose or the baby born and then left to die. You get your pro-choice no matter what, why can’t you let us pro-lifers choose to save the kid?
Same goal? Nah. My goal is to not have anyone forced to continue a pregnancy against their will. Whether it’s an unwanted pregnancy or a wanted one that can’t be continued, people deserve the right to bodily autonomy.
Late term abortions occur because either the pregnant person’s life is at risk, or the fetus is either dead, dying, or will have a short and painful life once born. These are unviable wanted pregnancies, with grieving would-be parents.
People shouldn’t be required to go through invasive abdominal surgery if they don’t want to. Forcing someone to go through a c-section when they’re either a) potentially dying or b) grieving the loss of a wanted pregnancy is cruel and unnecessary. It’s all fine and good to suggest it as an “alternative” if you’re not the one that has to go through it. It’s painful, the recovery time sucks, and it’s expensive.
That’s not to mention that inducing early labour can be considered an abortion. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
“Yes doctor, save my life!” with a c-section ending and the pregnant person having a happy, healthy baby as a result is a pipe dream of yours, it’s quite clear that you haven’t thought much about this.
What you’re wanting to “save” from us evil pro-choicers are things like fetuses with anencephaly or other conditions where they will either die in the womb, not survive the birth, or will live a short and painful (and expensive) life in the NICU. So your “people will adopt them” idea is frankly bullshit. Not only are there plenty of children that already need homes and disabled children are statistically less likely to be adopted, but people who can get pregnant do not exist to make children for infertile people.
If someone has to abort their pregnancy in the third trimester, their lives are already hard enough. Let them end their pregnancies with dignity rather than subjecting them to invasive surgeries. What you want is not only unnecessary and expensive (surgeries cost a hell of a lot of money on their own, not to mention loss of income, recovery time, potential lifelong side effects, to name but a few), but also cruel.
Also I find it interesting that you didn’t reblog this directly from me and instead responded to someone else who reblogged it from me, so that it wouldn’t show up in my news feed. 🤔
This has been in our drafts for such a long time because I am…at a complete loss of words for how needlessly cruel OP is? Like,,,that’s a whole lot of what the actual fuck? Have you even READ The Handmaid’s Tale? I just…Margaret Atwood clearly presents what’s being done as a terrible, horrible atrocity. I’m speechless. What the actual fuck OP? WHAt the FUCk?!
Also, literally no one has an abortion “for funsies” in the third trimester. That does not happen. 91.1% of abortions are performed before 13 weeks. Were you aware that 70,000 women world-wide die each year from back-street abortions? You…clearly aren’t concerned about the lives of women and other afab people.
But…why would you want to dress up as rape enablers, apologists, and/or abusers? What does that say about personal character to you? Hmm? Think before you speak jesus christ.
-mod Aleksandr
And, yes, there are a lot of couples who want kids but for whatever reason can’t have them, be it infertility, or same sex couples, or medical issues that prevents carrying to term.
...There are already a lot of kids in the adoption system, though. So many kids, in fact, that plenty age out of the adoption system. So if those couples want to adopt and are able to provide a healthy environment for a child, there are plenty of kids out there who need parents. 20k kids a year age out of the adoption system in the US, for example, just to give an idea of how many additional people adopting kids are needed.
ETA: “There are a lot of couples that want kids but are infertile“ is such a fucking transparent attempt to guilt trip women into not getting abortions.
Instead of making fun of people who do things at an older age that are normally done younger ( like getting their diploma or GED, learning to drive, even learning to read ) how about you:
also consider these interesting tidbits:
additionally:
