i know i'm a hypocrite ok


“I wasn’t hiding. I just needed time to figure out how to talk to you. I don’t know if your memory is well but you were very rude last we spoke. I didn’t want that again.”
“Ohhhh yeahhh. I might recall something like that happening.”
“Excuse you, might? Something?”
“Ok. I was sort of a dick. There.”
“Sort of?!”
“Don’t push it. You’re no fucking angel, alright.”
“You’re a hypocrite, you know that?”
“But you look good. The color suits you.”

can i rant about something that i feel like is super important yet extremely understated? ok here goes:

heath care givers, scientists, and other health advocates oftentimes overlook the obstacle that poverty has on cancer prevention. i’m not talking about treatment, which we all know can absolutely devastate a family’s finances. i’m talking about the “simple” and “easy” day-to-day lifestyle actions that can dramatically decrease one’s risk of certain cancers, and how they can be hard to achieve when money is tight. 

take sunscreen for example. sun protection is the #1 best way to decrease one’s risk of skin cancer, the most commonly diagnosed type of cancer. but sunscreen can be a luxury when that ~$6/bottle needs to be spent on food, or saved up penny by penny for utilities or rent. and take into consideration that many low-wage jobs are spent outdoors, like farm workers. 

diet and exercise–other great ways to lower the risk of certain cancers (and other diseases). but the ratio of fast-food places to grocery stores with fresh produce can be extremely skewed in poorer neighborhoods. and then think about how much $5 can buy in terms of fresh vegetables and fruits (and then other ingredients to cook them with, along with the utilities to keep them fresh/cooked well) vs items from the dollar menu at mcdonalds. i see so many ads calling for the “mediterranean diet” to prevent cancer, and i always think… ok that’s pricey. fish is pricey. also if i was someone who worked a labor-intensive job, and only had $3 to spend on lunch, would i go for a low-calorie salad, or a high-calorie high-protein burger? 

and trying to jog through unsafe streets, without access to nearby and well-maintained parks? not easy. 

and then there’s cancer prevention routines at the clinic–like mammograms and pap smears and visits to the dermatologist to get a mole checked out. covered by insurance or not, these procedures involve having that time off from work/other responsibilities, and having the transportation to get to the clinic. again, very real obstacles for those who can’t afford them. 

none of what i’m saying here is new, nor is it isolated to just cancer prevention. talk to anyone experiencing or has experienced poverty about these concerns and they’ll say “well duh”. but the thing is that we–the people advocating for these “simple” cancer/other disease prevention strategies–are not listening to them and making the necessary changes to society. all i hear from scientists and doctors is “prevention is key!!!” and yes, that’s true, but i want to yell back “well what are you doing to address the societal and financial barriers to that!! your fancy DNA test to detect cancer early is neato and all but can everyone afford it!!!” 

and i get it. sometimes we as scientists and doctors can’t really have control over this (money has to come from somewhere, and we all have mouths to feed). but as a society, a community of people who can care for others, there are things we can do: raise minimum wage. have better employee benefits like more personal time off (to go to clinics). expand public transportation. have affordable universal healthcare. aliquot more government spending on scientific research to offset costs. promote neighborhood gardens, parks, better infrastructure (without gentrification). end the cycle of poverty and crime by means other than prison (like reaching out and understanding mental health needs, improving public education, etc). basically make the fundamental changes to society so the downstream effect is that people can realistically afford positive impacts to their health. 

bottomline: we can’t hope to prevent or cure cancer–or any other disease–until we address affordability and accessibility. a new diagnostic test is sweet and all, but it does absolutely nothing if it can’t actually help people

anonymous asked:

Okay so I'm gay and I'm all for equality & do my best to be open minded & respectful, but sometimes I catch myself not being so. Like sometimes I struggle understanding trans rights, even though I'm gay?! And sometimes I fall victim to the thinking of conservatives. Like we accuse conservatives of being close minded for not supporting LGBT rights, when liberals don't accept conservative views Ike being pro life... I don't know I just think it's hypocritical of liberals..

Ok so, not gonna lie, reading this was not fun. That being said, I sorta have this rule where if someone asks me a question, even if it’s problematic, I try my best to just answer calmly, hoping that if you’re asking a question it’s because you’re open to new ideas that might hopefully replace your existing ones.

Soooooo lets get started.

1. One of the biggest hurdles for the trans community is in fact the gay community, you expressing some sort of surprise that you, presumably a gay man, can at times feel transphobic would probably not come as any surprise to an actual trans person who has to deal with this all the time. Probably definitely saddens them, but not exactly surprising. I mean, the gay community by and large can still be very hostile towards trans people and some gay people will even casually shit all over trans people as a way of engendering themselves to conservatives as the Cool Gay. “Sure, I’m gay, but I’m not one of those liberal hippy gays, I believe in a gender binary, look at me and how much we have in common!” The thing is, yes, being a cis gay person makes it sometimes very hard to exactly understand what the experiences of a trans person are. The notion of feeling uneasy about ones gender, which for most of us is an aspect of our identity we just take for granted and don’t think about, is probably very alien to most cis people, even gay ones. However, you don’t really need to have an intimate understanding of every issue to simply respect that persons ability to lead a life that they feel reflects their most authentic self. At the end of the day, even if you’re someone who can never understand specifically what it feels like not be comfortable with your own gender, you can still hopefully understand that it’s not really your business to regulate other people’s lives. Conservative arguments about gender revolve around bathrooms - essentially making it impossible for trans people to work in a public building or even go out because once they leave their house they don’t have a bathroom to use. Their reasoning is the safety of others, specifically women and children, which is insane because there’s never been a single instance of a trans person attacking anyone in a bathroom and this whole argument is rooted in the same kind of bigotry that led people to characterize gay men as pedophiles for fucking years. So, I’m not really sure what about the conservative argument makes sense to you, personally I don’t see what right people have to regulate the private personal decisions of other citizens.

2. Next, women’s reproductive rights. Ok, so, the big problem here is pretty obvious just by the way you phrased your question, which was that you seem to view women’s access to their own reproductive rights as like this abstract argument. Sorta like, what should our tax rate be? 30% or 25%…. lets debate the merits of both sides and find out. The thing is, reproductive rights aren’t abstract. They may seem that way to men, even gay men, because men have no concept of how essential these rights are for women since our government at no point has ever regulated our lives and our bodies in order to trap us within certain moral norms.

But yeah, lets break this down a little. Why are reproductive rights so important to conservative ideology? Well, it’s actually not the Christian thing, since Christianity was completely silent on abortion throughout history until we began entering the industrial era. Why the change? Well because the shift from a pre to a post-industrial economy meant having tons of children was not feasible for most people anymore. Prior to industrialization if you wanted to lead a successful life you had to have children, lots of them, because children tended the fields, brought in the harvest, fed your animals, and the fact that kids didn’t always reach adulthood meant you had extra for just in case. Moreover, the industrial revolution made it very hard for families to survive one just one partners income, especially if you had more than just a couple kids. So what happens? Two things - women start going to work to help their families and they also start having abortions with much greater frequency because they literally could not afford these kids anymore. Now, why is this such an issue? Well because society up until this point was heavily invested in the idea of female domesticity, which was essentially a religious fable created by men that said women were the moral center of every family, which is why it was their jobs to raise the children and also to guide their husbands moral decisions. However, the only way women could stay pure enough to maintain this role was by not leaving the house, the public sphere was an ugly immoral place where people had to sell their virtues to get ahead and it was thought that if women were allowed to enter that world then morality as a whole would decay. It’s all bullshit, of course, but it was a very effective way of giving women the illusion of agency and influence while still keeping them locked up in their home. Plus, the fact that women were forced to believe that they were the pillars of morality created a sense of duty for them to stay with their husbands and fulfill their role. POINT IS, ok, so now women are leaving their homes, how do we fix that? Oh, right, lets make it fucking impossible for women to work or have careers by taking away their agency to make decisions about their own lives. Like, oh, you don’t want this fourth baby because it’ll prevent you from being able to have a job and your family will suffer as a consequence? Too bad! Sucks to suck #awomansplace. All that said, did any anti-abortion regulations ever actually stop abortions? NO. Women were still having abortions, the only difference was that they were having them in alley ways and butcher shops. They were getting sick from an infection or a botched surgery and dying and for what?? To have the same sort of basic agency and free will to determine the circumstances of their lives that men have always had as a given and take for granted.

Reproductive rights is essential to every other aspect of a woman’s life. It determines what level of education they can get, what their income could be, what sort of personal freedom they’ll have to go on vacation, or date, or just have a night out with friends, and sometimes it even determines whether they’ll live or die. And that’s what conservatives want. They want to use women’s reproductive biology as a tool to subjugate them and make them less independent, it’s a way of exercising patriarchal control over women by making those women dependent on either a man or government assistance just to survive financially. So, yeah, the lives of women aren’t simply an abstract idea you toss around, debating the pros and cons of, as if it’s all the same.

Call it hypocritical if you want, but I think that’s an awful mischaracterization of things because at no point in time are liberals ever trying to control or regulate a private aspects of a conservatives life. I think liberal ideology is about being accepting of whatever personal choices people make as long as those choices don’t have a direct negative impact on another persons happiness or freedom. It doesn’t mean accept anything without question. If a person wants to impose control on another individual then no, we won’t accept that, because people should not get to build their political ideology based on their ability to exert control into other people’s lives.

ANYWAYS, this has been super long and it honestly doesn’t even cover half of the complexities of these issues so I hope you’ll do your own research and keep thinking about these topics while also remembering that as a cis male your ability to actually understand the experience of others is limited, but that doesn’t mean you can’t educate yourself and try to empathize with those that are different than yourself and imagine how you’d feel if you were trapped in their circumstances.

anonymous asked:

You IRs are hypocrites saying that you are all a sane united community and such, do you remember what happened when the manga ended? Does burning dvds and ripped merchandise ring a bell? I think it's you guys who are pushing death threats to Kubo just like the stupid Narusaku fandom. Not to mention spamming Kubo's twitter with your little IR fantasies. So stop saying IH is sending death threats to you guys, its you guys who are at fault.

ok i don’t know if you’re familiar with the revolutionary concept of “purchasing” items but here’s how it goes. usually the item you want to “purchase” has a “price” you need to pay in order for you to obtain it. after you pay for it, that item is yours, you own it (amazing isn’t it!) i’m actually heavily against damaging books, it’s why i still have my bleach manga/character book even after the ending. but i’m not gonna tell someone else what to do with their property, especially if it doesn’t affect me or anyone else negatively. you don’t get to tell others what they do with their hard-earned money or their books, because it’s not yours and it never will be. the fans who burned the books showed more support for kubo than you and probably most IH’s ever will. yeah positive and encouraging comments are nice but they don’t bring food to the table. this dumbass ask you just sent me doesn’t pay his rent, the money people spent on his manga does, even if they burn the manga afterwards. why do you even care what we do with our books? 

and kubo got troll comments for years on twitter even before he deactivated. non ichiruki shippers used to spam him with images of this porn star who looked like him and told him he was a horrible writer. you guys love to act as if he only got hate after the ending but he got a lot of hate even before. check any place where you can read bleach and leave comments you’ll see most of them speak negatively of bleach/kubo and only followed out of obligation. if you’d gone on his twitter/latest tweet you’d see comments like these

so when we criticize him we’re demons who are sending him death threats, but when we’re commenting nice stuff we’re trying to spam him with fantasies? not to mention (and this was like 2 tweets below those ones)

you guys are so obsessed with us that you can’t even write a sentence without mentioning us. you’re so used to piggy-backing on other ships (RR for the novel, IR for literally everything else) that you can’t even compliment the creator without referring back to us. the ichiruki fandom has its own “civilized” fandom it seems. 

as for it being our fault for the death threats: sure, if that’s what helps you sleep at night. no one asked for you to tell me your very irrelevant opinion and yet here you are, begging for validation in true IH fashion. cry some more about the “mean ichirukitards” i honestly don’t give a fuck. cao ni ma.

I guess everyone isn’t gonna agree with this but. I strongly dislike these “how to support an artist” posts because I think they guilt trip people. What’s the point of someone sharing your artwork if they don’t feel like it? Doesn’t it feel better to have your art going around because people like it and not because they feel obligated  to retweet? If someone wants to buy your merch/art/commission you, they’ll do it, do not guilt trip them into giving you money. When someone really appreciates what you do, they’ll support you. Don’t force them to do so. And I think it’s more important to have people share and pay for your work because they feel moved by it rather than because “that’s how you have to do it or i’ll die of hunger!!!”. I know fellow artists out there are also poor but guilt tripping isn’t the right way.

Same goes with being mad at people for mainly liking fanarts. Artists who draw original art aren’t any superior. People who mainly enjoy fanart have the right to because they already know the characters. Also let’s not be hypocrites, we ALL scroll past art that doesn’t interest us. If someone sees art they like, they’ll like or/and reblog it. Original or not. Some artists really need to tone down on the salt.


I know I can sometimes get a little irritated. I can come off strong and fight for what I believe in. Sometimes I talk too much when I’m passionate about something…but I hope I never come off as hypocritical, toxic, or mean. I know some bloggers preach “safe space” all day but then become vicious the second you cross them. I stick up for myself and others, but I never want to harm people in the process. Never be afraid to confront me over something that seems wrong. I genuinely care about the well being of my followers, and I’m here to listen.

anonymous asked:

Can I add something to your perfect post? 1) Non CC fandom should rethink about what bullying really is. 2)I'm a 32 yo gay man and even if I don't need an actor to know that being gay is ok I also know how important is to new generations to have a sort of model to look up to and I can assure you, this straight agenda is rude, offensive and hypocrital. So yes, I sort of care if D is straight because if he is, he's failing in supporting the community. If he's not, he should be better than this.

Thanks anon and of course you can add. While no part of the fandom behaves perfectly I wish the larger parts of the fandom for D & C and the smaller ones for W & M would have some self awareness on how they behave. Supporting D’s straightness doesn’t get you a ‘get out of jail free card’ for shitty behaviour.

Your second point is a one that comes up frequently because representation really matters and the roles he’s famous for aren’t straight (he could be such a great role model), yet his publicity always pushes a ‘straight in real life’ tag line and I see how this makes him look disrespectful/ungrateful to the community especially as those roles were probably a major source of income and exposure for him. The current PR strategy makes him him look bad as an straight ally too - he’s committed some huge ‘foot in mouth’ errors (trevor project anyone!), but as a closeted actor I will cut him some slack because coming out is such a huge decision for anyone and maybe he isn’t ready yet or is restricted from doing so and maybe he could achieve more by doing it when he’s at the top of his game. I don’t know - ACS maybe the huge stepping stone for some mainstream fame where he could make a even bigger difference by coming out, but I can only speculate;).

In the meantime I will wait to see what will happen with the PR around ACS to see if the PR approach alters. At the moment with all the photos we are getting of D I am expecting some sort of pap shot of m/arren soon especially as M’s just got her hair done. Signs are there for a massive straight push too and I’ll happily discuss that with you too, but off anon.

anonymous asked:

it is extremely disappointing to see that you support clinton. i'm sorry, but it is. how can you write whole essays and shit about institutional racism and not see how hypocritical you're being by supporting her. you're too smart to pretend people are somehow being disingenuous or whatever about her and what she's doing. and you're too smart to pretend i'm just some pro-trump loony or that pro-trump people are the only ones who feel this way. deflect if you want but you know it's true.

Ok, ok. 

I said this:

and then you said what you said. And inasmuch as a tweet means anything, now I’m saying this:

Hillary is guilty of being,

  • a white woman who, like all white people, was born blind and raised deaf to her complicity in America’s titanic system of domestic racism; 
  • an ambitious person who, like all ambitious people, is fundamentally indifferent to those who have not chosen to enter the arena of combat with her;
  • a politician who, like all of them, says whatever is momentarily popular and maintains the most perfect silence on what everyone knows to be true;
  • and a Clinton who, like all Clintons, believes in nothing and is therefore capable of saying and doing whatever the moment requires. 

Now, I would argue this makes her barely more than a human person to begin with but, in addition to these qualities, she is also running for president. And a president is, 

  • a three-dimensional hologram projected by bond traders, the military-industrial complex, constitutional necessity, the collective fears of white people older than 45, and, to the smallest possible degree, the idealism of the Declaration of Independence;
  • a golem summoned from the silt of international trade and this trade’s requirement that violence be restricted to economically unimportant branches of the human family;
  • a ghost who patrols the planet Earth, who maintains its status quo with prophecies of material wealth or else by spooky threats of ejection from the global order & exposure to the wolves that wait beyond its firelight.

This is what anybody who wants to become president is going to be. This fact is the ultimate tragedy of power, ambition, and civic virtue in America. No matter how idealistic you are, and Barack Obama was pretty idealistic as far as politicians go, if you become the President of the United States you’re gonna spend years being crushed in the most exacting mill of souls ever devised. 

This is why ambitious people are pathetic and why presidents are pitiable above everyone else. It’s why power is a curse and how those who wield power are punished in direct proportion to their fondness for it.

So it oughta be clear that I don’t have any great respect for Hillary in particular or for the presidency in general but, because I’m a human being who needs the planet Earth in order to live, I have to pay a certain amount of attention to who wants the job. 

And I also want revenge.

I want the evil cocklords in the Republican party to pay. I want every last one of them to feel the political norms they’ve betrayed return as glowing brands that burn both cheeks of their ass. I want Mitch McConnell to spend a long and pointless life screaming himself hoarse at a Supreme Court stacked nine deep with black pussyhaving, pussyloving justices. I want Paul Ryan to realize that Ayn Rand’s ‘philosophy’ was an endless rope of sand, and that his attempt to attain power by climbing it was one big, life-long jerk-off. I want Reince Priebus to feel the hook go through his cheek and then its line drag him down to the eternal abyss of shame, disgrace and oblivion as it follows the sinking corpse of Donald Trump. I want Roger Ailes to see a woman in the presidency.

But in the end, I hate Hillary for what she’s going to do as much as I hate myself for knowing she needs to do it. This is because, in the end, the concentration of carbon dioxide as measured in parts per million is more important than whether Hillary is woke, whether she gratifies my desire to punish, or whether she makes your skin crawl when she speaks. She is precisely the person who can successfully perform the revolting calculus of international power politics. And this is what has to be done if we’re going to hold the global temperature anomaly to one and a half degrees Celsius. 

And make no mistake: she is going to kill people to do this. Whether this means protecting the Saudis as they wage their criminal war against Yemeni civilians so their insane royal family does not obstruct a post-petroleum world-order. Or if not this, then fomenting a bloody coup against Filipino psychopath-in-chief Rodrigo Duterte to keep him from becoming China’s boy in the South China Sea, hence preventing him from smashing the precarious balance of peace American hegemony has maintained on the Pacific rim. Or if not that, then any of the hundred thousand other horrible things the United States will have to do to orchestrate a relatively peaceful transition from fossil fuels to whatever follows them. Because, and you should be under no illusions as to this point, global peace is presently maintained by the imminent threat of death from above as delivered by the U.S. Air Force. And preventing the worst excesses of climate change from killing millions of people as it also wipes away much of human civilization will require a certain level of global peace. Because if you think the Syrian refugee crisis was bad remember that it is the result of a single, smallish country disintegrating because agriculture was no longer possible there. Now imagine that everything south of the Himalayas has become unfarmable. Imagine the instability, war and genocide that a billion refugees would trigger. 

Humanity will be relying for its survival on the most delicate thread by which global politics are suspended: the absence of war. We have a global order capable of producing this and Hillary is the person capable of pouring a great deal of innocent blood on the altar of its maintenance. Our existence on this planet is too tenuous, and the requirements for fixing climate change much too stringent to wait around for a global order that better pleases our sensibilities. 

Regretfully yours,

anonymous asked:

hey Dean.. I know that your whole thing is family, and hold on to your family and stuff... but I get tired of my family really fast, sometimes it's like I'm invisible with them. they don't really even care about anything I say... -Ella

Bobby once said that family doesn’t end in blood but you have to remember that it doesn’t always start there, either. Sometimes you have to make your own family and that’s ok. It’s ok to split off from them if it’s not healthy for you. But, and I know I’m a friggin’ hypocrite to say this, try talking to them about how you feel first. Maybe they don’t even realize they’re doing it. -Dean