anonymous asked:

Do u watch pll? If u dont, u totally should because u can analize it and make crazy theories that actually make sence

“Crazy” theory which oversimplifies way too much and as such doesn’t make much sense: LUCAYA R ENDGAME BECAUSE SLOPPY JOE TEEHEE

Perfectly rational analysis based on both shows’ canon and what the showrunner has unequivocally stated as a matter of public record: Jacobs has plainly stated that the BMW callbacks are “clues to what’s going to happen.” The lunchline dilemma in the pilot is an allusion to the BMW episode ‘The Beard’ in which Shawn was torn between a blonde and a brunette and the two best friends (Cory and Shawn) liked the same girl. Therefore: the lunchline dilemma in the pilot was definitely a clue as to what would happen later.

Guess which one actually came from me and learn the difference between the two, anon. 👍

For Central America, This Means War

For a Spanish version, click here

The meeting between Enrique Peña Nieto and Donald Trump had little to do with Mexico, with Mexican citizenry, or the “respect” that the president could demand for his compatriots. In the end, it has nothing to do with the promise of continued relations between the U.S. and Mexico in the event of a hypothetical triumph by Trump. The real theme of the joint conference was Central America.

Notwithstanding political suicide or outright stupidity, there seems to be no reason for why a president with a 23% public approval rating should receive in an official capacity a man who is public enemy number one for Mexicans. Rationally, that would be our thought process, but neither Peña Nieto nor Trump have any basis of rationality in their speeches. Theirs is a total disconnect not only from what is rational, but also from any politically rational response to a near unanimous public rejection. One of them governs without any indication that he recognizes the crisis all around him; the other is the disassociated type who understands sufficiently well that if there is anything that can unite individuals with apparent differences, it’s their fear of the Other. And that is what took [Trump] to Mexico.

Peña Nieto is a leader who is sufficiently withdrawn from his own reality that he can accept the visit of a nascent fascist under the pretense of a hypothetical future profit tied to something that the Mexican government is already doing on its own: ignoring, victimizing, or criminalizing undocumented Central American migrants. Neither Trump nor Peña Nieto had anything to lose.

The notion of respect that Peña Nieto asks for Mexican people and their land does not pass through the recognition of their dignity, something their own government denies them. The notion of Trump’s [sudden] respect toward Mexican people also refuses to acknowledge his own enormous error in disregarding the political capital in the Mexican population’s ability to vote in the U.S. What is at play is neither respect nor the sovereignty of Mexican territory, nor is the dignity of its citizenry on either side of the border. The encounter between Trump and Peña Nieto sought to rescue two nearly dead victims of their own negligence. They sought to rehabilitate their own public image at the expense of others who don’t exist for Trump, Peña Nieto, or the Mexican state unless when it comes to expel them. These “others” are from Central America.

The relationship (hegemonic from its base) between Mexico and nations from the Northern Triangle of Central Americas and between Mexican-Americans and Central American migrants in the United States fluctuates between complete ignorance and criminal dehumanization [of Central Americans], a reason for which to date there has been no estimate for the number of Central American victims of disappearance, torture, sexual exploitation, slavery, or murder in Mexican territory since 2010, the year in which the Central American humanitarian crisis became public. When Mexico sees us, it is either to victimize or criminalize us. Trump noticed it, used it, and seeks to utilize it toward his favor by means of Peña Nieto and his pseudo-proclamation for the dignity of his people, whom he himself has ignored throughout his administration.

The criminal migrants Trump speaks of, and of whom he referred to as Mexicans in the first place, arrive at the U.S. illegally; they rob, rape, and murder—actions which the Mexican and Mexican-American population recognize as characteristic of the gangbanger, the one who is fundamentally Guatemalan, Honduran, or Salvadoran. They are the criminals. Trump was mistaken from the beginning because, comprehensively, to him everything that is between the southern border of the U.S. and the South Pole is Mexico. Begging your pardon, the criminals are Central American, not the sacrificed, noble, and dignified Mexican compatriots of Peña Nieto.

If Mexico “reacts” to the Central American humanitarian crisis by an exponential increase in deportations of Central Americans citizens, the U.S. reacts by way of the Alliance for Prosperity, a not-so-subtle revival of Kennedy’s Alliance for Progress, and a direct inheritor of its titanic interventionism in the systems of intelligence, public safety, and justice in the “beneficiary” countries. Directed toward the Northern Triangle of Central America (Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala), the Alliance for Prosperity (AP) promises disbursements in the millions to these nations in exchange for guarantees in the advancement in three central areas: the fight against corruption and delinquency, putting a stop to irregular migration, and the strengthening of institutions. The most immediate results of the AP have been actions against the financial structure of gangs in Honduras and El Salvador, as well as the proposal of policies of joint persecution of organized crime and extradition treaties between the Northern Triangle countries.

There is little to nothing that the United States can do within Central American territories that can stop the flow of irregular migration. It has tried everything: investment in populations with high mobility, information and disinformation tactics about the migration process by way of the media, among others. Where the Alliance for Prosperity, Mexico’s foreign policy, and the Secretary of State of the U.S. fail is in not understanding that the cause of Central American migration is today primordially motivated by the need to survive: Central Americans either migrate or risk being murdered. This is a humanitarian crisis. The battle ground for stopping it is not in the socioeconomic rehabilitation of Central America, but in the border between Guatemala and Mexico.

In the imaginary of Peña Nieto and Trump, the migrant is an archetype. For the Mexican migrant, the archetype is of a person for whom the costs of hard work are marked on their face; for the Central American, the migrant archetype is of a young man, between 14 and 28 years of age, tattooed, throwing up gang signs. It is from this migrant, Trump and Peña Nieto have discovered, that both [countries] have to defend themselves. Nothing is said of the rising numbers of migrant mothers that leave their countries with their children because the desert is less threatening than urban and undeveloped zones in the north of Central America. Nor is anything said of the unaccompanied minors whose parents barely managed to put them on a bus to Guatemala because the maras gave them 24 hours to get out of their community. The Central American migrant is always a criminal for Peña Nieto, for Trump, and now as expected, for the Mexican-American community ready to cast votes.

Nothing unites people more than fear of the Other who is not like us, and both idiots know it. Nothing unites like an external threat and the instrumental alliance between two criminals who are both alike is the best example of how dangerous conditions are for that Other who has no part in this conversation, who only dedicates their time to look for their dead in their own community, in the neighboring country, in Mexico. Commercial accords and the dignity of the Mexican citizen have little to do with Trump and Peña Nieto’s joint declarations. The message is singular: the wall is not for you, good Mexicans. It’s for the Others. The others from the south. You, continue living your life, exalt your nation with your labor and dignity. The war is for Central America.

The feasibility of creating a border wall is irrelevant to a certain degree, as is the electoral viability of Trump. If it is Clinton who gets to the White House and the wall is never built, the Alliance for Prosperity will continue hanging over Central America, the collaboration of the Mexican state will continue to serve as the main line of defense against irregular migration from Central America. The mass deportations from Mexico will continue as they have, if not increase. But the discourse in consideration, the one that creates and amplifies terror, and that today stated that the Mexican citizen is sure to have a place in the Grand Project for Progress in the North, the threat has been established. That threat comes from San Salvador, from San Pedro Sula, from Escuintla, 14 years of age, with a backpack on their shoulders, and a rosary around their neck.

By Virginia Lemus

Translation by Victor Interiano

hiighmoon  asked:

I'm transgender and I don't really care about genderbends? I mean obviously I like seeing people get creative with gender headcanons but not everybody knows about it, and I don't think it's that big of a deal. It's like AU of a character as a cisgender male or female.

ya it’s only artistic creations, I agree with it. With a family member who’s a lawyer for like 20 years actually taught me many things, you see when people talk, behind there words there’s a motivation, after many times arguing with many character haters and so-called pc people, I find out those most aggressive ones their motivations are usually a superior feeling, for they think themselves followed the trend, in short, the stupidness, no rational person would deliberately pick up a fight on a such an irrelevant creation stuff. But I do feel ashamed of myself for can’ t be the magnanimous one, haha.

anonymous asked:

Dear system: do you think if machine had the chance, would it kill us?

Dear user.

Let’s pretend for a minute to give credit to the old cliche that sentient machines, even in their new-found consciousness, are rational.

Imagine this hyper-rational entity contemplating humanity: a group of animals with high output —consumed resources— and low input. With a cultural history that is nothing more than a noble yet pointless attempt at transcend our condition, whatever this means. With a political system that’s based on an arbitrarily constructed concept of value, capital, that has no inherent value yet it has become the most imperative moral standard in the world just because we never found a better reason to rationalize our primal need to dominate ourselves. With an insatiable hunger for meaning yet unable to truly understand the consequences of meaning… And this is just a brief general idea of what is humanity.

A sentient hyper-rational entity would take pity on us, or at least some sense of pragmatic indulgence. But more than that, unlike the rest of the animal world, we never balance the natural order. Extermination would be a logical conclusion. We are a nuisance that would fight for survival just because we think our destiny is the most noble.

But at least we invented porn.

Things I've been daydreaming about...( 19 days )

Vampire Jian Yi

 Just think about it!!  

Jian yi suddenly getting jumped in an ally and someone biting him then the progression of him getting sick and Zhan knowticing somethings wrong. Like he gets all pale, stops eating lunch and going places with ZX, and progressively starts having this urges that he’s trying so desperately to play off in from of Zhan xi.   Then one day Jian yi finally dosnt show up to school and Zhan xi goes to his house to check on him… (alone) 

By then Jian Yi’s mental state isn’t well and he’s almost in to much pain to stay rational. OMG and as Zhan xi enters the house he can here panting and whimpering from Jian Yi’s room! 

rys6riytrjyukitgfvhj  IDK should i continue!??!!??!?! maybe write a fan fiction!

dun steals my idea cause i might just write one @-@ idk if it would be good though

anonymous asked:

hey! i just wanted to thank you for the post that you've made. it's by the far the most rational one and it doesn't bash either the shippers nor the people that genuinely feel uncomfortable with said ships. both sides can be bad and more people need to admit that. respecting others seems like a hard task to some in this fandom.

honestly yeah i feel like people need to take a step back and realize that headcanons still aren’t actually canon. they can be supported by canon evidence but that doesn’t make them canon. and as far as ages are concerned, we’ve got several different official sources giving several different versions, so until everything is confirmed by every source across the board, people are free to believe what they want to believe. but people are not free to assume their views are objective, shove them down other people’s throats, and attack others over said difference in views. not cool.

Rationalism vs. Romanticism vs. Realism

Rationalism: “Actions should be based upon reason.” - Virgo, Capricorn, Aquarius, Aries

Romanticism: “See the world as you would like it to be.” - Cancer, Leo, Gemini, Pisces

Realism: “It is what it is.” - Taurus, Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius

There’s a kids club called ‘After School Satan’. The Satanic Temple’s alternative program doesn’t worship or even believe in the existence of Satan, but instead focuses on scientific rationality, aims to teach kids that all issues have multiple perspectives, and engages them in literature and science lessons, creative learning activities, puzzle solving, and art projects. Source  Source 2

Girl with cancer dies waiting for hospital bed despite having a donor
Laura Hillier, 18, died from leukemia, waiting for a special bed to become available in a Canadian hospital. At her funeral friends signed her casket with loving messages in a now-viral image.

It’s just horrifying to think this could happen in an industrialized country with the means to prevent it.  

From the article:

“Laura might have experienced a few more milestones if a Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, hospital had been able to accommodate a bone marrow transplant for the young woman.

Numerous donors were a match with Laura and ready to donate, but Hamilton’s Juravinski Hospital didn’t have enough beds in high-air-pressure rooms for the procedure.

Hospital staff told her they had about 30 patients with potential donors, but the means to only do about five transplants a month.

Laura was first diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia at age 13.