why you should not dismiss research unless you rly truly mean it
Internet, I am a queer researcher of queer health and I have something to say.
A few weeks back, a study went viral about the relationship between marriage equality policy and queer teen suicide rates, and a lot of people reacted thusly: “queer mental health is better when we’re not discriminated against! BREAKING: SKY IS BLUE, WATER IS WET”
This happens a lot. People see research about a thing ~Everyone Already Knows~ and they mock it. Now I want to make two things really clear:
1. Everyone does not already know.
2. This shit can lose these projects their funding.
Did you know that media coverage is a crucial factor in funding allocation? When we submit our application for grant renewal, we have to provide a list of news articles about our research so they can decide whether the public cares enough about us to let us keep doing our work. And most research doesn’t get all that much coverage, so individual reactions can really matter. If the primary reaction to our publications is eyerolling, we legitimately might not be able to continue.
I’ve seen some frustration from people who believe this research funding would be better put to use “actually helping” the affected populations instead of–I don’t know, pinning them under microscopes or whatever it is they think we do. But funding for policy initiatives is driven by research. I know you wish politicians would listen to individual voices telling them where the problems are, but that’s honestly not a smart way to direct limited resources. We need solid evidence. And a lot of the areas that need the most attention aren’t obvious–who knew bisexual people are at a much higher risk for physical and mental health disparities than gay and lesbian people? Who would have guessed that transgender folks are more likely than any other group (including straight people) to be military veterans, but overwhelmingly don’t claim their benefits? I’m sure some people noticed these patterns, but they definitely weren’t common knowledge within the queer communities I’ve grown up around, and those findings are leading to direct action as we speak.
I get that it can be frustrating to feel like your identity is being reduced to facts and figures for the benefit of red tape. But trust me, the researchers aren’t your enemy here. Most of us are queer too. All of us are just as frustrated by this crap as you are. We are doing our best, and I swear to you this work really is making a difference. Please don’t sabotage it.
Steven Universe + the diverse cast of female voice actresses → requested by anonymous
From top to bottom: Susan Egan, Estelle, DeeDee Magno Hall, Michaela Dietz, Charlyne Yi, Erica Luttrell, Jennifer Paz, Kimberly Brooks, Shelby Rabara, Rita Rani Ahuja, Aimee Mann, Nicki Minaj, AJ Michalka, Grace Rolek, Kate Micucci, Mary Elizabeth McGlynn, Reagan Gomez-Preston, Toks Olagundoye
Do you ever think about how fat nonbinary people who were AFAB are consistantly shoved into a feminine box / forced into feminine roles and beauty standards by…. literally everyone??
Like?? We can’t be seen as andro / masculine because we dont fit into the ‘Classic Nonbinary Aesthetic’ (thin / heavily andro because of that thinness). A lot of the time we HAVE to wear Feminine clothing bc the accesible clothing industries dont make those NB styles in our size (and yeah no, Im not buying a $100 pair of custom pants online, bc not everyone has money to dole out on Wardrobe. The fact that id have to pay more than $20 is a huge issue too).
Society in general doesnt see People with large hips and thighs, big butts, and big chests as anything but Fat Women– and society includes other LGBTQIA people. Us having fat-female characteristics is nearly inescapable and that ideal and inital 'Theyre too fat to be andro / masculine’ thought pattern COMPLETELY needs to change.
Like…The fact that I am fat does not make me a lesser Nonbinary person. My hips, my thighs, my chest, my smaller waist do not make me a lesser Nonbinary person– and they definitely dont make me a woman. What I wear to accomodate my body does not make me less Nonbinary. Change that fucking narrative.
Tbh my one problem with gender q***r theory is that they have no fucking clue what they’re talking about and it drives me nuts. What is gender? What does identifying with a gender mean? Is it gender roles? Is it personality? Is it dysphoria? Is it a social construct? Is it a choice? Is it the friends we made along the way?
I’ve spent years inmersed in q***r theory and i’ve yet to see a coherent answer
What would you say is the most spot on characterization of jason? or what combinations of story arcs/continuities together make the best/most accurate jason todd? love your blog btw, im just getting into batfam hell and want to understand the characters more- thank you!
No problem, anon.
I encourage every Jason fan to go back and read his entire 80s Post-Crisis run (even the Pre-Crisis stuff has some cute things but it’s basically a different character so). I think it’s hugely important to know who Jason actually was before he died (and DC’s terrible retcons and victim blaming should be avoided at all costs). Also he’s a super cute little bean and I love him.
Obviously the end of that is Death in the Family.
From there, go with his return in Batman: Under the Red Hood (Hush is optional but there is a tie in). The trade includes some annuals, one of which explains the resurrection (and i overall prefer it to Lost Days which did some things I don’t really agree with).
Lost Days should be read, it’s a bit of a mixed bag, your mileage may vary, but it has some neat stuff and this is Post-Crisis Jason so we can’t be picky.
From there, skip the rest of Post-Crisis, the entire new 52, and go straight to Red Hood and the Outlaws Rebirth.
Do not pass Go. Do not collect 200 dollars and the terrible characterizations that I’m helpfully directing you to avoid.
I’m playing a Pathfinder game with 8 other people, including the DM and we were investigating a missing persons case. The party consisted of 2 warriors, a druid, a sorcerer, a witch, a ranger, a cleric, and two rogues (one being myself). In the basement of the missing millers’ house we came across a flesh construct made of 2 or 3 gnolls.
Fighter(Tank): Everyone run we can’t defeat this creature!
Cleric(trapped in corner by the construct): Go without me I’ll distract it! JUST RUN!!
DM: Mr. Smiles(the flesh construct) strikes down the cleric with it’s axe and sword.
Me: EVERYONE BOOK IT!
DM: Mr Smiles begins to chase you as you leave the basement.
Now Dying Cleric: Beware! This beast has 3 assess!!! 3 of them!
When I get invited, I’m often the only woman and I’m often the only person of colour at this event. So if I can’t make it because of my work, I get an enormous amount of pressure to come, because if I’m not there, a minority and a woman will not be represented. That pressure sometimes is a little unfair, because me being included makes other people seem like they’re open-minded and diverse.