inherent rights

And I realised – I realised how badly I’d been treated before, if my standards had become so low. If the freedom I’d been granted felt like a privilege and not an inherent right.
Rhys’s eyes darkened, and I knew he read what I thought, felt. “You might be my mate,” he said, “but you remain your own person. You decide your fate – your choices. Not me. You chose yesterday. You choose every day. Forever.

Sarah J Maas, ACOMAF

Originally posted by meanwhileongiphy

anonymous asked:

omg my lecturer was giving a speech about how the idea of multiculturalism is "problematic" and in my naievery i thought it'd be about the destruction of the native cultural but NO apparently it's "problematic" because with the term multiculturalism we're saying that our native cultures are the main ones and we're allowing other cultures in to be the Multi when they have an inherent right to be here and there is no English or German culture or anything?? Peak Leftist

There’s a point where they might as well go full Noel Ignatiev and say that they want Europeans to disappear. 

Stop minimizing and discounting your feelings. You have every right to feel the way you do. Your feelings may not always be logical, but they are always valid. Because if you feel something, then you feel it and it’s real to you. It’s not something you can ignore or wish away. It’s there, gnawing at you, tugging at your core, and in order to find peace, you have to give yourself permission to feel whatever it is you feel. You have to let go of what you’ve been told you “should” or “shouldn’t” feel. You have to drown out the voices of people who try to shame you into silence. You have to listen to the sound of your own breathing and honor the truth inside you. Because despite what you may believe, you don’t need anyone’s validation or approval to feel what you feel. Your feelings are inherently right and true. They’re important and they matter — you matter — and it is more than okay to feel what you feel. Don’t let anyone, including yourself, convince you otherwise.
—  Daniell Koepke

Once, during a fight with my parents when I was about 12, I told them that the reason I was upset was that I felt disrespected by them. Their response was that was fine because I hadn’t earned respect because I was just a child. They weren’t of the opinion that it had anything to do with my behavior even. They said that no child deserves to be respected because they haven’t lived long enough. They told me they deserved to get respected by me because they were adults but that they did not have to respect me in return because I hadn’t earned respect by living a long enough time. I asked them if you had to do anything special to get respected as an adult and they said no, you just have to be an adult. I told them that I thought that was wrong and that all human beings are born deserving to be respected. They didn’t agree nor did they ever bother to respect me when I was a child. When I became an adult, they disproved their own theory by continuing to not respect me even though my being an adult, by their own reasoning, should’ve automatically earned that from them.

I was raised by some of the stupidest people who ever lived.

Autistic people are just as awesome, wonderful, and valid as any other person.

When society keeps claiming stuff like “the way you do things is weird” or “you don’t look normal” or “you should try harder to fit in”… they’re the ones who are wrong, not anything about you.

Neurotypical standards or means of expression should not get to be the default, because the spectrum of human life experience is far wider than that.

Neurotypical is not “right” and neurodiverse, including autistic, is not “wrong”.

Being your unique self is inherently right, no matter how that looks for you and how different it may be, because there is goodness and beauty and worth and importance in every human and their individual life experiences.

The thing is; it’s perfectly ok for people to not want to own a firearm, or be opposed to violence, even in self defense.

It’s their choice as to how they want to react to that possible situation, and even if they do not act in violence to defend themselves, or even actively oppose harm being done in their name by proxy, that does not mean they give consent to be harmed.

Just because a person does not defend themselves, does not rescind their inherent right to make decisions. Even if that decision is possibly very bad for their health or safety, as long as that decision is one made by themselves, understanding the risks, they have the right to do so.

It only becomes a problem when they desire to erase the ability of other people to choose whether and how they defend themselves.

It's ok to be angry

What abusive parents do to their children is unconscionable. It is indefensible. It is an outrage and a crime against the inherent rights of every human child. It is the lowest of the low. It completely lacks integrity. It lacks all humanity. Abusive parents don’t have even the easiest, basic aspects of humanity. Believe me. That’s what it takes to abuse a child. It takes no humanity. And you deserved humanity. You deserved more than that. You deserved love and instead what you got was constantly stripped of your dignity. It was WRONG.

I want all of you to hear that.

You were not wrong. You did nothing wrong. Nothing you could ever do justifies abuse towards you. They are the ones who are wrong. The abuse you suffered was wrong. It was wrong and it was wrong of them. I know. I’m saying wrong a million times. It’s because it’s hard for us survivors to believe it. But it’s true and I want you to know that unequivocally. THEY were wrong. It was ALL THEIR FAULT. Completely and totally. Not one single iota of it was your fault. NOT ONE. I don’t usually use caps, but they are needed here. Because you were wronged, deeply, and it’s natural and you have every right to be absolutely seething about it.

Abusive parents are particularly oppressive toward any expression of anger from others at their behavior toward them. You may have a hard time feeling angry at them. That’s ok. Don’t force yourself to feel the anger. Just know that it’s ok when you do. That when it finally does come, you are completely within the norm and within your rights to just GO WILD WITH IT.

“Wooow, that is incredible allyship. so very kind. Maybe now the Niqab ban can be lifted? And police control over Muslim women’s body and our clothing choice can stop? Maybe all the reported cases of violence against Muslim women by state actors can be criminalized? did we all forget that whilst praising France for allowing the Eiffel Tower to go dark in ” solidarity" how racist the French government and citizenry are? Did we forget he continual and rising hate crimes Muslim women and girls have reported? That thru have passed legislation the further targets, and violates the inherent rights of Muslim and Muslim-passing communities and individuals because of white French nationalism?

Ya. Turning off the lights on a famous tower does nothing. Let’s hold states more accountable for their complacent and contributing acts of racism, discrimination and gendered violence. “
- Hamda Deria

Brave taught me just how important representation is. Despite being spoiled for choice in characters that looked like me, all of a sudden this curly haired Scottish girl who rides horses, does archery and has little interest in marriage could see not only herself, but her land and culture on the big screen. There were people who sounded like me, words I understood, cultural references that were familiar, and music that was in my blood. It resonated with me on a level I still cannot explain, and not simply because I could see myself in Merida. Brave felt so inherently mine, right down to the wisps and stone circles.

To know that out there, someone feels exactly the same about Moana is the best feeling in the world. Representation matters. 

hey let’s have a little chat about consummation laws

consummation laws were created to force women to have sex with their husbands, which was deemed an inherent right on the part of the husband - as in, women owed their spouse sex. if women did not participate in sex with their spouses, it would be grounds for annulment because the woman wasn’t ‘fulfilling her duty’ to her husband. this was systemic misogyny.

modern consummation laws take different forms depending on the society it upholds. in the west, it’s largely a remnant of the same patriarchal law mentioned earlier, and can still be used as such, but it isn’t upheld to nearly the same degree. in many places in the west if you inform a judicial institution that you and your spouse haven’t had sex, the most common response would be ‘why are you telling us this?’ addition: annulment cannot be forced upon you by the court system, it must be put forth by one of the people in the marriage.

in the west, it can also be used against immigrants who marry western spouses for citizenship, as a way of forcing deportation if the spouse has not ‘fulfilled their duty’ to participate in sex in return for asylum or citizenship in a western country. this is an issue that immigrant women in particular face, but exceptions are always possible. ultimately, modern consummation laws are evident of systemic misogyny, and can be used as an outlet for racism and xenophobia.

in eastern countries, consummation laws are often used much in the same way as they were in western history, wherein women owe their husbands sex in return for shelter, protection, etc. this can be seen, for example, in impoverished regions in my home country india, or other areas that still operate with a dowry system and view women as property instead of people. this is systemic misogyny.

consummation laws, where they are still upheld, do not take into account sexual attraction. whether or not the spouses are sexually attracted to each other is irrelevant. the point of consummation laws is the action of sex, not desire for one’s partner.

therefore, consummation laws affect people who are 1) in a marriage and 2) do not engage in the action of sex. anyone can wish to abstain from sex, and abstinence is not a requirement to identify as asexual.

equating the concept of asexual oppression with consummation laws insinuates a few things: 1) that all asexual people do not have sex 2) that all non-asexual people do 3) the intended use of consummation laws is to disenfranchise asexual people

as an asexual person i ask that people stop using consummation laws as evidence of systemic oppression of asexual people, as asexuality does not equal abstinence and not being asexual does not equal always consenting to or wanting to participate in sex.

I realized how badly I’d been treated before, if my standards had become so low. If the freedom I’d been granted felt like a privilege and not an inherent right.
—  A Court of Mist and Fury, by Sarah J Maas, page 577

reasons why people protested obama’s inauguration:

  • they were upset their candidate didn’t win + racism

reasons why people WORLDWIDE are protesting drumpf’s inauguration:

  • they are people of color living in a nation of a trigger-happy police force
  • they are lgbt+ now officially living under an administration who thinks they should be tortured 
  • they are chronically ill or have disabilities and are going to lose their health insurance
  • they are going to lose access to safe abortions and other women’s health resources
  • they are working to help heal this planet from the centuries of ecological damage we have done
  • they are not okay with a candidate who was supported by the KKK
  • they are citizens of a foreign nation with relations with the US who are appalled by what has happened
  • because a candidate who was the most qualified in history won the vote by more than 3 millions votes but still lost the election

these marches are a WORLDWIDE occurrence, this is not a single political party throwing a tantrum because they didn’t win. this is the entire world standing together in one voice saying that we are not going to condone any infringement on our rights and that the world deserves better leaders.  

The Citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for giving to Mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy: a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship. It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection, should demean themselves as good citizens.

May the Children of the Stock of Abraham, who dwell in this land, continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other Inhabitants; while every one shall sit under his own vine and fig tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid.

—  George Washington to Moses Sexias of the Hebrew Congregation in Newport, Rhode Island, in the first presidential declaration of the free and equal status of Jews in America, 1790

An AU where instead of hopping into Anders, Justice ends up sharing a body with Ser Pounce-A-Lot and the events of DA2 are roughly the same but also there’s a levitating cat possessed by a Fade spirit who has a lot of thoughts about animal cruelty and also the inherent and inalienable right of cats to sit wherever they would like to sit, justice is giving kitties the lap space they deserve

Reylo Fans! Help Me out?

So I’ve seen a lot of Reylo support and anger and general mayham surrounding this ship. And to be honest, I don’t understand it.

I didn’t see the validity of the ship in the movie. I haven’t seen the potential romance.

But I also didn’t see the romance and wonder of Korrasami. I do now. I didn’t like Tony Stark for a long time. I would defend him to the death now.

What I would like, are examples, are explanations of this ship. not so I can tear it down, but so i can understand why people love it so, and maybe grow to love it myself. I would like to truly hear people’s explanations and arguments, with the inherent right to be able to respectfully disagree if I continue to feel like doing so.

Think of me as Dora the Explorer.  You all can be the giant blue arrow.

anonymous asked:

But why not? Why can't it be changed? I think I'd be okay not being female as long as I wasn't male I don't... I don't understand anything

It’s actually pretty simple: your sex is your sex the same way your species is human. It’s your physical being. There’s nothing inherently right or wrong about it, it just is

The problem becomes when human society imposes cultural expectations on people based on whether they’re male or female. People get treated vastly differently depending on which sex they are. They have certain behaviors discouraged, threatened or even beaten out of them depending on which sex they are. That is something you can work to change.

Human cultures and values can change because we create them. The functions of organic life are not something you can change, nor something you should feel like you have to change. There’s nothing wrong with your body.