It’s weird to think that some people aren’t daydreaming 24/7 and creating all kinds of stories and worlds in their heads. Do you mean that when you’re listening to music or walking somewhere your mind is just blank? Sounds weird.

I daydream a lot, but may I say that the ability to just completely quiet my thoughts is a useful one.

That does sound mighty useful. Mind if I borrow yours?

I keep fucking seeing "here's the gamestop stock news for people who don't understand" and then proceed to use words like 'hedge fund' and 'stock'. We don't fucking know what those are. So i read about it and talked to people who spent years studying capitalism and I'm gonna break this down as far as I can bc it's frustrating.

Hedge funds are rich people getting in lil groups to put their money together to hopefully turn it into more money. They do this by investing in large quantities of stock which, at it's most basic, is like a piece of a company. By owning stock you own a lil baby piece of the company metaphorical pie.

The price of stock changes, goes up and down, based on the success of the company. If a company is doing good, it's stock price goes up. If it's doing bad, price goes down.

Now gamestop hasn't been doing well, so if you had $10 worth of gamestop stock, it was on track to be worth $1 in the future.

The hedge funds saw this and did what's called "shorting the stock". In order to "shorten the stock" they go up to the stock counter and say

Hedge Fund: "Hey, can I borrow some stock and i give it back later"

Stock person: "Yeah, but you have to GIVE IT BACK LATER. Promise?"

Hedge fund: "yeah bro, promise" then they do whatever the fuck that chest pounding thing from wolf of wall street was.

So hedge fund takes that stock, which is $10 now, sells it to Grimace that purple chicken nugget for $10.

Now as I said before, gamestop isn't doing good, so once that $10 stock turns into $1 stock, Grimace is like "fuck dude, this was a bad deal, buy it back from me for $1 (which is what it's worth now)"

And the hedge fund buys the stock back for $1 and returns it to the stock person they borrowed it from.

How much money did they make? Answer below:

$9.

And it works! So they get away with doing this.

So what happened in January 2021?

People saw them doing this process called shorting stock and said "that's kinda fucked" and called the hedge funds on their bluff.

They bought up that stock.

Now something absolutely maddening about establishing the stock market as a pillar of your countries economy is it can be wildly volatile. Because it's all speculative. We have formulas for it now, but this is Econ 001 for people who can't stomach it, so we're saying it's all speculative.

People saw that this stock was getting bought up. And economists and capitalists and little people on their robinhood apps only want to buy stock when it looks like it's gonna be really valuable soon. They think they're gonna buy stock for $1 and its gonna turn back into $10.

But buying stock itself also increases the value of stock because it's gonna be more valuable cus people are buying it so it's doing good and people are buying it.

It's a disgusting money ouroboros.

But anyway. These hedge funds have stock out there that they sold to someone and they don't have it back yet. And the price isnt just rising, it's skyrocketing.

So the hedge funds borrowed stock that wasn't theirs, sold it for $10 (thinking they could buy it back for $1), and then the stock is worth $140. BUT THEY STILL NEED TO RETURN THE STOCK THEY BORROWED.

So the hedge funds gotta buy all that stock back at $140.

I've been using small numbers cus I'm sure u read that humans have a hard time conceptualizing big numbers, but what happened in the last 24hrs was really big numbers.

So hedge funds, billionaires, and other wealthy swindlers got screwed on this big time. So screwed that apparently the government gave the hedge funds our tax money to make sure they didn't stop being billionaires.

And that might be what happened i don't really know, reading about this much stock exchange in such a short period of time made me sick and I'm about to black out.

Correct any errors but if you use unapproachable vernacular without clarification I'm gonna ignore u so hard.

I’ll try to keep this as simple as possible, so if anything remains unclear just say the word - And that isn’t all! First to shed some more context on all of this: A while ago when Gamestop was in the dumpster, Randy Cohen bought a whole bunch of shares. To be exact, 12% of the company. This is what is known as a “controlling stake”, because it puts him on the Board of Directors, which are the big suits with fancy cigars and top-hats that call the shots. The relevant information here is, Randy Cohen is the founder of a *very* successful e-commerce website, and brought the people over to Gamestop that helped him make it. Gamestop is also restructuring to have less stores, but offer custom PC building at their locations (Lots of money in that.) All of which is to say - for people in the know, Gamestop suddenly wasn’t as dying as the general public assumes it was. Specific people on wallstreetbets saw this a long time ago, namely /u/DeepFuckingValue (who is now worth 40 million $, after a buy-in of 14 thousand $), and over time started organic growth. This is what caused the slow rise of the share price (one “stock” is called one “share”, I’m going to use that from now on.) to roundabout 40€ over the span of weeks. Now the thing to know is. The Big Guys with many fat sacks of money, have been shorting Gamestop for years. They have been actively driving Gamestop the company towards slow bankruptcy just so that they could keep shorting the stock and get a profit. To a point where Gamestop became the most shorted company in history. To an illegal degree. I’m going to reiterate how shorting a stock works: The Monopoly Man borrows a share from the Bank, sells it to the poor man, buys it back later at a lower cost, gives the borrowed share back. That is how it is supposed to work. What can happen, however, is that The Monopoly Man will sell a share that the Bank hasn’t given him yet - meaning he sold a promise of a share that doesn’t really exist. This is what is known as a “naked short”, because the position isn’t  “covered” - like a man without pants is uncovered, see?  This is, of course, highly illegal, but in typical rich man tradition this stopped more or less no one. The current situation is that 140% of available shares have been shorted. This means, if the Bank were to call back its shares now, The Monopoly Man has to come up with 40% more shares than currently exist in a form that can be bought. (You can call your Bank and say that you do not want your shares to be borrowed to others, that is roughly how this situation can happen).

Typically a short has no set expiry date, there’s just sort of a loose promise to give it back at some point, but common dates are End of Week, End of Month, End of Year. What we saw last friday was that the shorts of Melvin Capital expired, meaning the Bank said “Right, that’s enough, give us our shares back, NOW.” and because Banks matter, unlike the common people, Malvin Capital had to buy back every single share he borrowed from the bank at once - he waited till the last possible moment since there was the hope that the stock would still go down, and he could reduce his losses, maybe even turn a profit. Having to buy all those borrowed shares at the same instant is when a “short squeeze” happens, which is when the price gets momentarily squeezed up and spikes. This is what happened on friday, when the price per share went from 40€ to 60€, all thanks to that short squeeze. Doesn’t sound like a lot, right? Only 20€ after all. Melvin Capital lost 2.something billion dollars.  But that is not where it ends!. Citadel, a different Big Money Bag, bailed Melvin out. Melvin used those funds to short Gamestop again. Citadel themselves also have shorts on Gamestop.  And for the week the price actually held, so nothing really bad happened - no profit but no loss either.  Till Elon Musk, who personally hates shorters, as shorters have betted on Tesla going under for a long time, gave a shoutout to Gamestop. Suddenly the price per share is at 200€. Now is when things get hectic. Remember Citadel from a few sentences up? Those are the Big Money Bags behind RobinHood, which is the trading app that most americans use to trade stocks. About 50% of RobinHood users have shares of Gamestop. Remember, Citadel has shorts on Gamestop themselves, and they bailed out Melvin Capital, who also has more shorts on Gamestop. In the singularly most illegal move you will possibly see in your lifetime, RobinHood prevented people from trading. You could only sell your shares, no longer buy. This resulted in a dip in the share price, though it has mostly recovered, so their ploy failed. Not satisfied with that, RobinHood has now started selling shares for their users - you can not cancel those orders, and yes that is incredible amounts of illegal - but we’re talking about so much money here, if Citadel manges to survive the week, they can deal with any lawsuits after. So people panic-sell their shares, RobinHood forces people to sell shares, all so that the shorters can “cover” their positions by buying a share now to give back to the Bank when due day comes. I’m personally hoping that this won’t be enough, because as long as people continue to hold, really they have all the power. Now. WHY is everyone holding, why didn’t we sell when it was at 400€ earlier?  Remember the short squeezs from earlier. Melvin Capital and Citadel aren’t the only ones with skin in the game. Remember, 140% of shares have been shorted. What the people over on wallstreetbets, and me, are hoping for, is that an “infinity squeeze” will happen - for this there is actually a pretty nice visualization.

Let’s do some basic logic here. You have hedgefunds desperate to buy 20 shares. 30 Shares are in a position where they can be sold. What happens? Hedgefunds keep raising the price they are offering to buy at, till people start cracking and sell their shares. The longer people wait, the higher the price goes, but there is still more supply than demand. But we are in a position where, if all shorts expire at once, hedgefunds HAVE TO buy 20 shares.... but there are only 14 on the market. And people aren’t selling. This causes the theoretical price to go up to infinity- the longer you hold, the more your share will be worth. 5000$ per share honestly isn’t out of the question anymore. As long as people hold, the price will go up. Naturally people will cash out at SOME point - how is this going to work given that there are quite literally less shares available than the shorters need? Honestly, I don’t know! But this is all only going to happen if people hold. If the bubble collapses, prices go down, and the shorters can cover their positions at no significant cost - the dream dies, no tendies are made, Wallstreet wins. If the people hold? Every single one of us goes home rich. The Hedgefunds lose untold billions, many will go out of business.  And that’s where we are right now! If the infinity squeeze will happen or not, who knows, if I knew I’d not be posting on tumblr, I’d be crashing Yachts into each other for fun. This still left out a lot of detail, but I hope I simplified it enough to be understandable. If any questions remain, feel free to hit me up either in the notes or directly.

This is an excellent explanation, but it unfortunately leaves out a couple important things.

1. Just like (as mentioned above) the people from reddit buying up stocks raised the price because so many stocks were being bought at around the same time, the people from the hedgefunds selling so many stocks at the same time drove it down, and by the exact same mechanism. This is a big part of the controversy: the “artificial” raising of the price by reddit users that the Wealthy Investors are complaining about is more or less the same standard stock manipulating tactic those Wealthy Investors were themselves using. It’s just that the amount of assets needed to cause a significant change in price is so large that it was thought that only the Already Rich could do it. It wasn’t a problem until the lowly commoner banded together to try it.

2. The majority of the reddit users involved in this are NOT. MOTIVATED. BY. PROFIT.

The ones initially riding the coattails to riches mostly cashed out already, and are regarded as traitors by their fellows. Some have sold specifically to pay for family medical bills or to against all odds provide a home for their families, and have been supported by the r/wallstreetbets community for it. The people still in it, still holding their shares? They have one goal: Make the rich lose money. And spending ANY time at all looking at the subreddit would show you this. The original stated goal was to cost the people Shorting the stock money. Nearly every post on the effort since has focused on how much money the hedgefunds will lose. Many memes being shared there explicitly state that loss of potential profit on their part for not selling is inconsequential compared to the future losses of the people Shorting.

Could they make a lot of money in the coming Infinite Squeeze? Sure. But that was NEVER the goal. And the people on Wallstreet? The Stock Brokers and Financial Analysts and Hedgefund Managers? They simply cannot wrap their minds around it. The idea that profit might not be the end all motivation of a person simply fails to manifest for them. After all, they were taught that the Holy Profit was to be the first priority at all times, that the Sacred Bottom Line is to be defended at all costs. Anyone that deviated from this was a target, and wasn’t allowed to survive in the market. When you see News Anchors talk about money being the motivation, it’s because they are listening to those people on Wallstreet. It’s because they either didn’t believe the words being loudly shouted by the users of r/wallstreetbets, they didn’t bother to even check, or they too are unable to entertain the idea that money isn’t the only motivation a person can have.

If they sell in the Infinite Squeeze, r/wallstreetbets users could make a lot of money. If they sell, they could cost the Hedgefunds a lot of money. But answer me this: If they DON’T sell... what happens to the Hedgefunds? Wouldn’t that be worse? Wouldn’t whatever legalistic consequences that follow not being able to honor their Short better satisfy the desires of the reddit users?

Evil cannot comprehend good.

ok very funny guys. you got me. now seriously who left all these neurotypicals in charge of the mental health field

who left all these healthy doctors in charge of the hospital

is literally what this sounds like

God, can you imagine how awful that would be? People with amputations consulting on things like prosthesis?

People in wheelchairs designing living and working spaces for people with mobility issues?

Autistic people actually trying to help other autistic people?

OMG, just thing – wouldn’t ti be awful if people who are now in remission actually helped manage the pain and other symptoms that come with having and treating cancer?

I mean seriously, what on Earth do any of those people really have to add to the discussion? What could they possibly know that an able-bodied neurotypical wouldn’t already know? I mean, experience doesn’t teach all that much!

/end sarcasm.

My care for EDS got radically better when my doctor’s kid was diagnosed. 

Dr. Marsha M. Linehan more or less reinvented the field of behavioral therapy after spending years being treated to the worst 1950-60s psychiatry had to offer. She created the system now known as Dialectical Behavioral Therapy, now considered one of the most effective treatments for suicidal and self-destructive behaviors, as well as pretty much any other form of mental illness or mood/behavior disorders. She was able to do all of this BECAUSE she’s self-diagnosed with borderline personality disorder, not in spite of it.

Fuck, is this still doing the rounds? I’m so sorry. Thanks everyone for setting me straight.

Bilbo Baggins went on one trip in his early twenties and never stopped going on about it and I'm just saying he's a gap year student

He was 50 years old. Even accounting for hobbits’ average lifespan and longer adolescence, he was the equivalent of a man in his mid-thirties at least. (Unlike with Frodo, who was the same age but played – albeit magnificently – by an 18-year-old, you don’t have the excuse of the movie version getting this too wrong; Martin Freeman was an acceptably mature 39 when cast as Bilbo.)

a lot of the time when generalising people latch onto one trend or trope or concept and run wild when they should consider at least one counterbalancing idea in a yin-yang kind of way to ensure a bare minimum of accuracy.

for example it’s easy to think of China as an authoritarian top-down rigidly formal hierarchy in which all activities are centrally planned and unfold in lockstep according to high level directives, but you can also see China as a bubbling stew of people who run wild doing their own thing without giving any heed to rules or regulations, from the Ming dynasty pirate-merchants up to the millions of small enterprises that thrive across the south east today, with the emperor / party vainly trying to keep a lid on it all.

similarly England and Japan are societies with strict social roles and demanding etiquette and formality that simultaneously manage to tolerate a lot of weirdness and eccentricity, while America is a freedom-loving libertyfest that demands exacting conformance from its citizens and frowns on European inventions like public nudity.

obviously playing two opposing tendencies against each other like this is fertile ground for facile insight porn, but at least it’s an improvement on just picking one idea and beating it into the ground.

Well, it’s the interaction between these tendencies that explains so much about the cultures in question: the Great Leap Forward, philately and hentai, and mass shootings by “lone wolf” fascists, to use your respective examples. Call it “facile insight porn” if you wish; the stark difference between the examples I chose of expressions of the interaction in the cases of England and Japan obviously takes some further explaining.

“Not use collective punishment as it is not fair on the many people who did nothing and under the 1949 Geneva Conventions it is a war crime.”

Wait it’s a fucking WAR CRIME?!?! I mean that might not be 100% accurate but now I gotta know

holy crap, collective punishment is a war crime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention#Collective_punishments

and according to the exact legal phrasing-

No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

This technically counts, as students are civilians, and thus considered a “protected person”. So yes, collective classroom punishment breaks the fourth Geneva Convention, and she should be rewarded for standing up for human rights and doing her research.

Power-move: accuse your teacher of a war crime using knowledge they supplied you with

Every time I see this I wonder if anyone is serious and thinks that this applies outside the context of war.

When we point out that things like this (or, say, the use of chemical weapons by riot police, to take a less frivolous example) are banned by the Geneva Conventions, we’re not literally saying that the conventions are civil laws and that the behaviour is illegal, let alone a war crime. We’re saying that such things are sufficiently barbaric that even the laws and customs of war forbid them, and that that should give us pause.

Rammas Echor, Sindarin for “Great Circle-Wall”, was a major fortification protecting Minas Tirith. Built following the loss of Minas Ithil, it served as the second line of defense against the East, The first being the Anduin river. It completely encompasses the fertile town lands of Pelennor and the White City, with three major gates. The North gate, The South Gate, and Osgiliath Gate protected by the causeway forts. It ran 10 leagues around the Pelennor, and it’s farthest point of the Osgiliath gate was 4 leagues away. The wall’s first major action was during the War of the Ring, where the Witch-King’s army breached the causeway forts with large explosives and siege weaponry. It was taken quickly, and the next major battle would be at Minas Tirith. The Rohirrim came to the Battle of Pelennor past the occupied wall through the Stonewain Valley, a forgotten road known only to the Woses, Wildmen of the Drúadan Forest. An amazing example of Gondorian architecture, that wasn’t very useful.

“Death in the morning and at day’s ending lords took and lowly, Long now they sleep under grass in Gondor by the Great River. Grey now as tears, gleaming silver, red then it rolled, roaring water: foam dyed with blood flamed at sunset; as beacons mountains burned at evening; red fell the dew in Rammas Echor.”

- Ending stanza of the Mounds of Mundberg, regarding the dead of the Anduin. Return Of The King, The Battle Of The Pelennor Fields.

I loved the depiction of Minas Tirith itself in the films, but they got the Pelennor entirely wrong. There’s the Rammas Echor, just for starters. It’s not a grassy plain the size of a few football pitches. It’s 12 miles (nearly 20km) across, and full of farms, villages and even what we’d think of as suburbs. They were empty of people by the time of the battle — everyone retreated to Minas Tirith proper — but that was just a huge castle and the ancient core of the city, not the entirety of it as it was portrayed in the film.

Wearable Raspberry Pi by Jason Benson on flickr, who is clearly living in 3018

Amateur. If you’re going to make something like this, why in the name of repetitive strain injury would you give it a standard QWERTY layout? You’re going to have to relearn your muscle memory to type one-handed anyway. There are one-handed keyboard layouts that will be a heckling lot easier to use.

DIVORCE HIM

https://metro.co.uk/2017/11/01/male-incompetence-is-a-subtle-form-of-misogyny-7046248/

Put these garbage men in the garbage where they belong.

I went and checked the original source and it’s worse. While most of the comments get the problem (the lying, not the eggs) some of them just cannot see that this shit is actually a big honking warning sign for bigger shit. A loving person is not capable of doing this. 

He literally puts his mere convenience over her actual well being. This guy thought up and executed a plan where she has to do *all* the work (because of course it wasn’t just this one specific thing) while he watches her tire herself out from the sidelines. Imagine this going on for *years*. …now imagine this with kids. You think this guy cares if she gets off during sex? Would he take care of her if she were to get sick? Would he ever lift a finger if he could get away not doing it? 

She can’t trust a word he says and he doesn’t give a shit about her needs. It’s not about the *eggs*.

Sorry to reblog from you, stranger, but this commentary is all very good. I especially appreciate the emphasized statement that “a loving person is not capable of doing this.” That line is going to rattle around my brain for ages — the words feel good in my mouth. How you’ve said it is just so right.

I want to add some of OP’s further comments on the thread she made:

“To be fair, I have pretty high standards for cleanliness and his idea of clean vastly differs from mine and honestly, that’s okay! But now I’m starting to seriously wonder if he sabotaged cleaning, too, just to get me to do it. Dishes, for instance. He will wash half and leave a nasty sink full of the rest, claiming he’ll do them later. This drives me nuts, so I just do them. Often he will leave crusted on shit on then, too, so okay, I’ll just do them, right? Now because of the egg business, I’m seeing it as malicious.”

→ The husband is lazy. He seemingly commits to housework, only to bail partway through, and doesn’t even put in the effort required to do the job right in the first place.

“Yes, he sucks at dishes and laundry to the point he is banned from doing them. He will leave clothes in the washer overnight and doesnt separate anything to the point I’ve had many white clothes ruined. My favorite white brassiere is now pink due to his bullshit.”

→ The husband is inconsiderate of his wife’s property, even that which is well-loved. Could his repeated failure to learn how to do this task have been a ruse? Did he anticipate his banishment from laundry duty? OP now has to genuinely wonder about this.

“I’m starting to think he does things wrong on purpose now just to get me to do it. Another example! My car. For a while my driver side door wouldn’t open from the outside, so I had to crawl through the passenger side. He ordered a handle and kept putting it off for WEEKS. Finally, he says his hands are too big to do it, so I had to do it.”

→ The husband makes excuses for himself that cast him as an unwitting victim to fate, with the implication that he would totally do [action], if only he could. He distances himself from any possibility of blame.

Obviously, anonymous forum posts are taken with a grain of salt — we, as readers, will never know for sure if OP is real. That’s not a concern for me, though. Like I don’t care. The fact is that if one assumes this is all true, it is very obvious that the poster’s husband is a perfect example of maliciously feigned incompetence. He’s manipulative and lazy to the point of cruelty, expecting his wife to work while he fails to lift a single functioning finger. The statement that “he likes her eggs better” isn’t cute like some have stated in the replies to this post; it’s just another excuse that walls him off from criticism, a bullshit reason he pulled out of his ass to make her feel guilty and unreasonable for being upset.

The absurdity of the situation when taken at face value — lying about eggs, getting mad about making eggs, even just the reality of deviled eggs (an inherently silly prep style) being someone’s favorite food — extends an air of the absurd to the wife’s concerns, and to others’ warnings. I have noticed several comments to the tune of, “These people are all mad about eggs? What a joke! How oversensitive. That’s just how men are; this is just what marriage looks like.”

It’s fucked up, is what it is.

…deviled egg lady, if you’re truly out there somewhere, I hope you told your husband to make his own goddamn eggs from now on. It’s literally the least he can do.

@manthedog

“It’s literally the least he can do.”

we all just witnessed a fucking murder and it was beautiful.

Real talk time, folks:

If your partner (I am deliberately not using gendered words here), frequently and unashamedly feigns ignorance or incompetence to get out of tasks that affect both of you, warn the asshole once, warn them twice, and then dump the lazy freeloader.

Even someone who is legitimately bad at something can become moderately good at it, if they put some effort in, especially if it is important daily life tasks like cooking, cleaning and laundry.

For example: say your partner can’t cook. Not even something simple like pasta with tomato sauce. They never remember how much salt and pepper to put in that tomato sauce and they always forget that they have the pasta on the stove and then the entire thing burns. Well guess what? That’s what we invented cook books and recipes and egg timers for. Write that shit down (which ingredients, how much, how long, which temperature, etc.), then show them how it is done, and show them how to set the timer on their fucking phone, because I guaran-goddamn-tee you that every modern phone comes with a timer function. Show them how to do it once. Show them how to do it twice. If they still fuck it up the third time, you either have someone on your hands who cannot read (in which case, wow, great trust they have in you, their partner, that they don’t even tell you about that) or who just can’t be bothered to follow step by step instructions that were neatly laid out for them.

Your time is too precious to waste it on constantly babysitting your partner. A relationship should never be unilateral. It’s a team effort. And within a team, everyone has to pull their weight. If they can’t work with you, they are working against you.

Like, I know how to do laundry, I know about separating things out, how different settings should be used etc. but I dump my load into the washer and ignore all that.

But it’s my clothes. And only my clothes. I don’t care if the colors run.

I would NEVER do that to my partner’s clothes. I don’t do that for my father’s clothes when I do his laundry (which is uncommon he usually does his own).

Weaponized ignorance/the bumbling man trope needs to fucking die. This shit is EASY. They just don’t want to do the work so they dump the effort onto their partners. It’s horrid.

One of my psychology professors actually talked about this in the context of her own husband and how she dealt with it, which was namely: don’t let your partner get away with not doing basic housework just because they’re “bad” at it. All you’re doing is teaching them that incompetence (genuine or not) is rewarded, and reinforcing that behaviour.

When she saw that he (genuinely or not) had no idea how to properly wash dishes, she showed him how to do it, then she stood beside him and talked him through doing it, then she watched him do it on his own.

When he fucked up the dishes again while unsupervised, she went through the whole process again - “here I’ll show you, now you do it while I watch”

She never got mad at him, or yelled, or did anything where she could be accused of overreacting or being dramatic, just acted every time like she was teaching a child how to do these things for the first time. And after two or three rounds of this, he would start doing chores properly while unsupervised, either because (a) he now actually knew how to do them properly, or (b) (more likely) he’d realized that feigning incompetence would not get him out of housework, and he’d have to go through the humiliating experience of being taught how to do it again every time he fucked it up. And eventually he stopped the “feigning incompetence” thing altogether and started asking for help if he couldn’t do something instead of just not doing it.

(of course, I completely understand if someone doesn’t want to go through this process and just dumps their partner’s ass for being an asshole, and it’s not always going to work if they’re determined/malicious about it rather than just doing what they’ve always done, but this is one way to deal with it)

I mean ideally if someone is really bad at something or hates doing something, maybe one partner keeps doing it and the other partner does something else in turn. But the problem with these bumbling “I’m just bad at any inconvenient chores” dudes is that they do this across the board. They’re not going to go out of their way to do something nice because one partner is lifting the devilled egg reponsibility on their own. My ex boyfriend told me for fucking MONTHS he was going to paint a section of the kitchen wall. FUCKING MONTHS. When he finally did it (cause I was suuuuuch a naggy bitch) it took 20 minutes. If someone universally can not make an effort for their partner, whether it be laundry or remembering their preferences or common courtesy, it’s a sign that they don’t care. And yes, I am fully aware that there are mental health issues to make that harder, I have plenty of them. So I will probably forget important names and dates, and that sucks, and I won’t enjoy getting up early with you either, but I’m very happy to do all the dishes or set out tea things the night before when I am still awake and you’re sleeping, even if I don’t wake up when you do. Affection really is in the little things, and it’s so disgusting how women are constantly berated for being “over emotional” or “blowing things out of proportion if they point out a small thing that is a symptom of a much bigger problem.

Women should not have to train their partners to do basic shit. There is a pervasive expectation that it’s a woman’s job to either a) do ALL the housework/emotional work/kinship work and/or b) train the men in their lives to do it, often while the men purposefully refuse to pay attention or retain the information. And it’s misogyny.

Men are capable of figuring shit out on their own, especially in the era of YouTube tutorials and wikihow shit. Their incompetence in the face of these resources is deliberate. They are deliberately choosing not to learn to do work that they know they can get the women in their lives to do.

That’s not women’s responsibility. Women should not be expected to keep track of all the household chores and assign some to their partner in the first place – men are capable of noticing when dishes need to be done or floors need to be swept. And women should especially not be expected to train the men in their lives in the details of how to do that work.

Men need to step the fuck up and take classes or do some googling to make sure they know how to do their share of household work. If they don’t, they’re choosing not to.

As a man* who has significant anxiety around expectations, chores and routine, this is difficult for me. On the one hand, there is nothing here I disagree with, and I know a lot of men do this sort of thing completely wilfully. I was socialised to behave like this and I try very hard not to do it now.

On the other, there may be legitimate reasons why your partner can’t (or feels unable to) do a particular thing, even with encouragement and instruction, and even if they used to be able to do it. Of course they should tell you this, but the thing with anxieties is that they make it really difficult to open up about your problems, or sometimes to even articulate them to yourself in the first place. The emphasis, I think, needs to be on two-way communication: why do you think you can’t do this? That’s what more or less worked for me, anyway.

Taking this sort of post at face value is potentially ableist in that sense. I hesitate to post this, because I just know there’s a useless man or twenty out there who would jump on the chance to use that to dismiss the entire argument, and that’s emphatically not what I mean.

And I don’t intend this to call out any of the posters above, either; I’m sure it just didn’t occur to you. It only occurred to me because I’ve literally lived the situation, and even then it took me a while to figure out the cause of my unease, because on a conscious level I entirely agreed with the post.

*more or less.

I think a lot of people have trouble understanding transgender issues because they try to see themselves as trans, but come at it from the wrong direction. i.e. a cis woman tries to understand transness by going, “what if I felt like/wanted to be a man” when she should be approaching it as “what if I, a woman, was so easily mistaken for a man that I had to pretend to be one”,

And I think this is something to keep in mind and to explain away when trying to get these matters across to people who’re new to the idea.

i genuinely never thought of it that way but dang this makes a ton of sense now

thismposst is the one that made me get it

I will admit, I had to re-read this many times before it clicked in my head.

Damn well done OP!

It was this that made me realise I was probably somewhere on the genderqueer spectrum, because my answer was “Honestly, I’d just go with it.” Any issues I’d have with being perceived as a woman would be due to patriarchy and misogyny, not with my own gender identity.

I know this kind of realisation is sometimes seen as the first step towards realising you’re more conventionally trans (and I can’t rule it out), but as this points out, it’s not about merely wanting to be a particular gender. There are times when I feel like I might like to be a different gender, but there isn’t any associated dysphoria or feeling that I really am that gender involved. At most, there’s a sense of wistful jealousy and regret that I only have one life to live and experience.

req’d by @noisilyoptimisticmentality

i certainly fucking hope not. 

I thought this said Jesus Skin and thought of fortnite

i dont game is this a thing that can physically happen because can you imagine getting dropped in a fuckin field and immediately getting taken out by motherfuckin oily josh 

#what the fuck is oily josh tho#im scared#jesus skinwalker

okay so this is sort of an outdated meme but 

jesus ain’t from joshua lol

jesus has no hebrew root so if anyone is tryin to sell you this joshua/yeshua/whatever the hell don’t listen they lying

several etymology sites:

Joshua is the Greek equivalent of Yeshua. The names Joshua and Jesus are unrelated in origin. Jesus is not a Hebrew name, and does not have a Hebrew equivalent. Christians decided at some point that Jesus comes from Yeshua to attempt to convert Jews to their religion. I’m Jewish. Please don’t tell me that Wikipedia or Behindthename.com know my heritage better than I do.

I wasn’t trying to start a debate. I was just trying to point out that while Oily Josh is, admittedly hilarious, it is inaccurate.

also, in what way does Iesous sound anything like Jeshua? it’s supposed to be a transliteration and yet those two words are barely similar.

Dude I never meant for this to be a legitimate debate, I’m just usually leery of people telling me folks are lying to me without sourcing. If you’ve got better sourcing and information than I do, then by all means, correct me on stuff. This isn’t my area of expertise, I just wasn’t sure why you were telling me this when every hit i got in researching the etymology mentions Joshua. 

Maybe pewterdrag got leery b/c this kind of keys into a sort of in-group discourse regarding how messianics approach Jewish people, and the whole Jesus thing can kind of get a person jumpy. Tumblr can get real weird if you’re openly Jewish on this hellsite. It’s a whole-assed thing.

That said, I’ve never run into decent sources saying that the name “Jesus” wasn’t a transliteration of a transliteration. Like, words literally gotta come from somewhere. 

shit i had no idea. that fuckin sucks and I apologize for pinging the shitty messianic alarm bells and being part of the problem on this hellsite

You’re not. Don’t apologise. Tumblr user pewterdrag is either talking out their arse or more likely has been deliberately misinformed by someone who was. The etymological connection is a documented certainty; there’s no evangelical conspiracy. Names change and diverge a lot between languages and are often much more different than Jesus/Joshua.

For example: Evan, Giovanni, Hans, Ian, Ivan, Jack, Johannes, John, Juan, and Sean, among several others, are all descended from the one Hebrew name. Another single Hebrew name gave us Diego, Giacomo, Hamish, Jack again, Jacob, Jacques, Jaime, James and all its variants, and Seamus.

The Mercator projection vs the true size of each country.

Africa outsold

I don’t understand this ahshdhdhdh

basically maps exaggerate the landmass of most regions for aesthetic purposes

africa is the only continent that massive in reality (probably cause the Sahara is super vast); I think the conventional wisdom is that you can fit most if not all of north america within africa

What’s the real size of Africa? How Western states used maps to downplay size of continent (CNN)

“Mercator initially made globes. Later transferring his map from a three-dimensional curved surface to a flat sheet of paper was problematic. Taking the equator as the logical map center left big, confusing gaps near the poles.Mercator’s solution was to stretch out the northern and southern extremities of the globe to fill those gaps, producing an elegant and usable map.”

“[As a political tool,] one of the dangers of the Mercator map is that it can make enlarged countries seem unnaturally powerful and intimidating.”

Africa said no filter

Africa has what those other countries want

Oh, for…

It’s not for bleeding aesthetic reasons, and it’s not some racist colonial conspiracy. It’s practical. The Mercator preserves shapes and angles, which isn’t possible with a projection that preserves relative areas. For many things, the former is more important.

Google Maps, Apple Maps, OpenStreetMap and so on all use versions of the Mercator because it enables zooming in and out without distortion. Navigators use it because compass bearings are straight lines, which isn’t the case on equal-area maps.

Has it led to a misconception of the relative sizes (and importance) of countries? Yes. Has it been misused where another projection would be more appropriate? Also yes. But it has its place.

#5yrsago Genderswitched Bilbo makes The Hobbit a better read

Michelle Nijhuis’s five year old daughter insisted that Bilbo Baggins was a girl. After arguing about it for a while, Michelle decided to read her The Hobbit, switching Bilbo’s gender-pronoun throughout. And it worked brilliantly. Bilbo is a great heroine: “tough, resourceful, humble, funny, and uses her wits to make off with a spectacular piece of jewelry. Perhaps most importantly, she never makes an issue of her gender – and neither does anyone else.”

Pat Murphy wrote a novel based on this premise: There and Back Again, which is a retelling of The Hobbit as a science fiction story in which all the characters are female (in contrast to Tolkien, whose world is all but empty of women of any sort). It is, sadly, long out of print, but available used and well worth your attention.

In the meantime, this kind of on-the-fly changes to stories are part of what make reading aloud to your kid so much fun. Poesy often requests (demands) editorial changes to the books I read her, some of which have been surprisingly effective at improving the text.

https://boingboing.net/2013/12/30/genderswitched-bilbo-makes-the.html

New headcanon: just as the Hobbitish dialect of Westron had lost the T-V distinction preserved in southern dialects, it also lacked gender. As Dwarvish and Dalish also never had gender (cf. Rohirric, which was related to both Hobbitish and Dalish, and the common headcanon that Dwarvish society is less gendered than Mannish society), and the only named Elves Bilbo encountered were Elrond and Thranduil, Tolkien either didn’t notice or didn’t worry about getting characters’ genders correct (for many it may not have been possible) and just used “he” by default, as was the standard practice in 1930s academic English. Thus, the use of “he” should be taken without gender connotations in The Hobbit, and for references to Hobbit and Dwarf characters introduced there in later works, unless the text makes clear otherwise.

“Bilbo” itself, in Hobbitish, is a feminine name. Tolkien said that he tended to anglicise Hobbit names by changing their endings, but never (IIRC) explicitly said that he did this with Bilbo. So have fun!

Read Debord.

Vox actually did a pretty nice article about it, and in case you were wondering what charities it is supposed to be benefiting

https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/10/30/18043054/ben-jerrys-political-pecan-resist

Ben and Jerry’s isn’t making an empty advertising gesture. They company has supported Bernie Sanders, and made an ice cream flavor to raise awareness of global warming. They run progressive news stories on their websites and social media. They pay their workers a living wage. Even their brownies are sourced from a company that specializes in hiring people out of jail to help them get their lives back on track. They’re open supporters of socialism. I understand the idea of “no ethical consumption” but Ben and Jerry’s isn’t just adopting a political message for nothing.

It’s good to be cynical and demand more than empty gestures. But it’s wrong to be so cynical as to deny the possibility of anything but pure profit motive. After all, how would that make us any different from the capitalists?

anyway I don’t think the story of the 2016 election is that America wanted Trump.

I think the story of the US election is that a supreme court decision allowed states with a history of totalitarianism to arbitrarily change voting law in ways that made it disproportionately difficult for people likely to vote Democrat to vote while a foreign country was running an intelligence campaign to discourage voting on the left and, real time, prod right wing voters in important districts to vote during the election in a race with massive question marks about the security of voting infrastructure, with a widely unpopular Democratic presidential candidate–

And Trump still lost. By roughly three million votes.

That’s six times the loss George W Bush had when he won the electoral college without winning the popular vote in 2000.

Hilary Clinton won the popular vote by a larger margin than Jimmy Carter or Richard Nixon or John Kennedy; she just won it in the wrong places.

Trump is now president because the electoral college assigns more weight to rural states, which are also states with more discriminatory voter laws and more disenfranchisement and therefore states in which it is harder to vote for people likely to vote Democrat.

And all of that is what I mean when I say the biggest problem with the American system is gerrymandering.

Yes all of this is true, but again there’s still just under half of the electorate who’s willing to elect a fascist, and there needs to be a reckoning for this.

On the one hand, much less than half the electorate literally voted for him, due to abysmal turnout.

On the other hand, even discounting the unwillingly disenfranchised, much more than half the electorate effectively voted for him, for the same reason.

hey u know this bullshit quote that is misattributed to churchill or disraeli or whatever cunt. anyway i have been thinking about it of late and all i can think of is how i am progressively getter more far left to the point of full communism and hope to continue in this manner til i fucking die

Me at 16: fairly left-leaning

Me at 27: Eat the Rich

Me at 15: homophobic, unconsciously racist, self-important twat with no concept of women as people.

Me at 30 (now): genderpunk, ethics graduate, union rep, card-carrying antifascist.