tagging people i need to discuss this with

anonymous asked:

Has Jo been confirmed Trans in canon? Or is it just interviews?

(I posted most of the trans!Jo evidence about a week ago but that was in response to a much more negatively worded ask, so I’ll do it again so we can discuss the idea without having to acknowledge gross transphobic people in process).

Jo has never been confirmed as trans. Not in canon. Not in interviews. But that doesn’t mean there’s no evidence. 

In May, this interview was posted, in which Noelle said:

Mal and Molly aren’t the only characters who have gender and sexuality to figure out.

It’s worth noting that that was in response to a question about sexuality. Noelle mentioned gender without prompting.

Earlier this month, Noelle responded to a tweet asking about the gender requirements of being a Lumberjanes, with:

There are at least 2 trans/NB prominent Lumberjanes. Most likely more. 

A few days after that, an interview with Shannon and Noelle was posted here. About Barney, Noelle said:

It’s about gender and his relationship to gender and what his gender means to him and how the others treat him because of his gender. It comes back to Jo and how she feels about her gender.

Read that last bit again:

It comes back to Jo and how she feels about her gender.

On top of that, there’s the one canon hint that got most people started thinking about trans!Jo (from Issue 12):

(Also, I know some people who count the fact that fact that various people involved in making Lumberjanes have liked trans!Jo posts as ‘Word of God’, but I’m divided on that).

I hope this is somewhat helpful. 

You know, I basically never, ever talk about my follower count because it’s not important (and talking about follower counts/obsessing about them is extremely annoying), but I noticed since I started making posts about my therapy appointment and my sexuality (or lack of), I’ve lost a small portion of followers.

I can’t help but wonder why that is. I’ve tried to put actual discussion of it under read-mores and tag it so it’d be as unobtrusive as possible. I suppose maybe any discussion of sexuality at all is uncomfortable for them? I guess I just hope it’s because they’re taking care of themselves, and not because they have an issue with people like me?

In the future for my followers, if there’s anything I need to tag for just let me know, I’d be more than happy to put blacklist keywords in for you. I appreciate you following because it means you like the things I post, generally. So if there’s anything I can do to make your experience better, adding tags so you can avoid certain content honestly isn’t hard.

Hi, I’ve decided to make a small friends group just because it’s always nice to meet new friends and have a bunch of people from Tumblr in a group. You never know what to expect, and hey, the benefits are always great. 

what you need to do:

  • mbf me and petter
  • reblog this post (likes are for bookmarking!)
  • put in the tags why you wanna join
  • have kik messenger

what you get:

  • cool new friends
  • skype/insta/twitter exchange (+more)
  • selfie likes/reblogs
  • someone to discuss harry’s thighs with
  • new followers!!
  • html help + personal advice
  • a bunch of fucking weirdos
  • excessive swearing
youtube

MTV just came out with a documentary entitled White People, which essentially revolves around talking to white Americans and discussing white privilege within this country. They uploaded the whole thing to YouTube, so y’all should give it a watch!

anonymous asked:

how do i argue against my economics/political science/philosophy triple major ancom roommate when he says that raising minimum wage and providing government funding would actually work

I’d start by doing some homework. 

I get questions like this a lot “how do I argue against X person who believes Y?” and as much as I appreciate that people see me as a sage in that respect, it is absolutely imperative that you tailor your argument based upon your lived personal experience with these individuals. 

Not only should you familiarize yourself with information pertinent to these discussions, but you need to understand why your interlocutory partner believes what they do. Unless you can reach them on a personal level, you will not succeed no matter how many facts or statistics you offer.

With that in mind, I recommend that you peruse my minimum wage tag for a variety of arguments, discussions, links, statistics, etc. to begin your task.

anonymous asked:

sabo is practically the cinnamon roll too pure for this world for the revolutionary army yeah sure he can kill you in one swift move but he still needs to be protected because he's a dork who likes to doodle in memos and makes weird shaped dragon (dinosaur? chicken? dog?) in vegetables and excitedly talks about dragons ("THEY BREATHE FIRE, DUDE, SO FUCKING COOL" "UH HUH" "AND LIKE THEY'RE --") and he's just a delicate flower, that sabo, he also murdered 300+ people, such a cutie pie

aaaaaaWWW YES I’M CRYING THAT’S SO CUTE

“terrifying to his enemies, 100% sweetheart to his friends” is definitely the way i see him and i could imagine that like newer members of the revolutionary army who have only seen one side would have trouble understanding it

like someone who’s only been on a mission to free slaves with him would be like “holy SHIT this guy is dangerous and terrifying when he’s angry and he’s deadly intelligent when it comes to strategy” and get confused when people talk about him like he’s some dorky kid like “wtf this guy is fucking scary what are you people talking about ???”

meanwhile someone who’s only seen the more immature side of him is like “how the hell is someone like this second in command of the entire army, /I/ COULD PROBABLY RUN IT BETTER”

and then when they realize that he is genuinely both of these things, that is when they learn to respect, love, and fear him all at once

anonymous asked:

Whenever I see Calvin or Oli on my dash I feel like throwing up. They're both so triggering to me now after finding out about all the things they've done.

Blacklist them. I dont tag for shit, but going forward I will always tag “lads”, “oli” and “calvin”.

the issue is, this stuff REALLY needs to be discussed, but people also need to feel safe.

skygawker replied to your post: When do you think Vader’s speech start…

Alternately, Vader accidentally let slip a “wizard” while discussing new TIE fighter designs and received a Force-lightning-enhanced lesson from Sheev on speech properly befitting a Sith Lord. From then on he overcompensates.

Thank you friend, for opening the “is Palpatine somethings physically abusive in addition to emotionally and verbally?” door. Thank you. Bless you. 

Like sometimes people ask if Palpatine needs to be any more evil or Vader’s life any more terrible and the answer to both is always a resounding YES for me

 he says things like “Lord Vader, you know I am doing this so that you may one day reach your full potential” in between zaps. “I’m doing this for you

Listen

I know people like to get up in arms and have whole back and forths discussions on their Tumblr posts, but, if I don’t know or follow you, I don’t really care what you have to say about my opinions. Like seriously, I don’t care what I reblogged from you, unless I tagged you I don’t give two fucks what you think of what I said.

 I don’t need to “educate” myself about Rhaegar and Lyanna: I’m aware of how old they both are, and I still think she was a hypocrite for running off with a married father after having an issue with Robert’s bastard child. Rhaegar could have been 14 and a butcher, and I would have still thought that that was stupid. Robert wasn’t the greatest, but don’t sit here and pretend that Lyanna was blameless. I won’t even go into Rhaegar because there’s just no excuse there. The least he could have done was remove his wife and children from King’s Landing BEFORE making such a fucked up move. Even after, because he technically would have had to have passed King’s Landing in order to get to the Trident.   

And as far as I am concerned, I have never been here for Olicity. I love Felicity Smoak, but she could do a lot better than Oliver “Are there any more Lance sisters for me to fuck?” Queen. That fluke at the beginning of the last season was a waste of mine and everyone else’s life, but I was okay with Felicity dodging that bullet. When she fucked him and then drugged him at the end of the season, I was officially done. Like, thank you for not drugging him to fuck him, but how could he eve trust her after that? I wouldn’t even take so much as a Starbucks coffee from her. And then wasn’t she technically still with Ray? 

In my personal opinion, Laurel Lance is still the end game here.  STILL. The Arrow writers are super messy for some reason, but I feel like they’ll just bring him back around to her. 

In any case, back to my original thought: I don’t care what you thought of my opinion, because it’s MY OPINION. Like, I really don’t care if you agree with me or not because I’m not going to stress myself out and have an argument with you. If you’re right and I’m wrong, cool, I’ll admit to my wrongness. However, if you have an issue with my opinion being different from yours, you can go somewhere else with your bullshit. Please understand that I’m not coming at you personally. I’m literally just speaking my mind, and moving on. Go have an argument with someone who’s really attacking you. 

anonymous asked:

I'm really worried about this "debate" that is apparently going to be gotten into over the dagger in the season 5 premier. I don't come at this from any sort of shipping standpoint (that, unfortunately, seems to be the default in this fandom), but I do not, under any circumstances, want it to be or believe it should be Regina. One does not need magic to wield/protect the dagger and, in all honesty, Emma's bond with her parents and Killian is stronger. I think it should/will be Killian or Snow.

sorry - i’ve been away for a few days and i’ve missed a bunch.  i haven’t seen anything about a “debate” in the tags so i don’t know about the source of this spoiler or what people have been saying - is this speculation or from a reliable source?

but I’d be surprised if there wasn’t some kind of discussion over who should hold the dagger when we first see the characters react to Emma’s disappearance.

i can see the dagger going to Regina - just because she is the default magic go to person for the nevengers now - especially with Rumple in a coma after going full on villain. but honestly it’s kind of silly how the writers do that - Blue (although shady) seems to know a hell of a lot more than Regina. yet they hardly even consult with the fairies.

I think Snow is a good candidate - but I just can’t picture her holding on to it really. and she’s shown really bad judgement when it comes to things like this before. and it’d prob be too easy for a potentially evil Emma to convince Snow to hand over that dagger. and i think having it in her possession would be very unsettling and upsetting to her. with a newborn to care for she may not be the best person to be changed with protecting something so dangerous,

Henry seems like the  least controversial choice to me - but being a child I’m not sure if they’d place the responsibility on his shoulders.

Of course i’d like it to be Hook that holds the dagger - especially since Emma has repeatedly expressed to him and to others just how completely she trusts him. but I could see the Snow and Regina expressing concern over this - because they consider him rash and impulsive even if they do trust him now. but I also know that he has proven himself to be completely dedicated to and willing to die for Emma. 

i like the idea of him having it because of his connection to Emma AND connection to the Dark One.  I really hope that the writers emphasize Hook’s past connection to the DO story and don’t gloss over it like that usually do these things. He has a long history with this entity - and there’s a damn tattoo of that dagger on his forearm! It just makes sense to me that he plays a big role in this story.  And it makes sense to me for him to hold the dagger.

As a non-African American black person I often find myself in need of a word when engaging in discussions on racism/intraracism. A word that describes the racism(?) people perpetuate specifically towards African Americans (by non-black people and other black people alike). I’ve tagged some posts “anti-AA sentiment” but I feel like there should be a better word. 

anonymous asked:

Hi! Can I ask what do you think about cis people headcanoning fenris as trans? i'm cishet and i personally like this hc (not in a fetishizing way) but i once saw a post where a trans person said they felt uncomfortable with it.

i’m cis too but i think first and foremost, recognize as a cis person what your boundaries are when contributing to this headcanon. i think it’s okay to have the headcanon. i think it’s okay to create content that feature trans fenris in a non-fetishizing way. however, as cis people, we should not be making content specifically ABOUT being trans because they are not our stories to tell. i am aware there are trans people who are uncomfortable with the idea, and as such we as cis people need to respect their boundaries by understanding what we can do—such as tagging and being aware of what we should and shouldn’t do when discussing it. 

anonymous asked:

Please keep putting stuff about racial representation in the tag! I like seeing it.

flightofthelbd​ answered: I like that you do that because then I’m less likely to miss it.

toomanyfeelings5​ answered: personally, i think those posts are good and important, so yeah i’m cool with it. *thumbs up*

volcaniclily answered: I’ve never found it annoying.  It’s definitely important to think/talk about.

This is basically the consensus I’m getting.  Only one person said that we should try to shift these discussions to a new tag in general (which had nothing to do with not wanting them in the tags, but rather that we need a better tagging system for critiquing web series as a whole, I think.)  Which I agree with, but like Caitlin says I don’t want people to miss this stuff and I don’t know how to rectify this without trying to get everyone to post discussions in a different tag, which is not an easy task.  So I’ll probably continue posting things in the tags unless someone has a serious problem with it.  Thanks!

My dash is so full of Taylor vs Nicki shade. >.>

I’d rather be on Team Be Your Own Feminist Icon and Stop Jumping on Every Problematic Thing Celebs Do Without Realizing It Because They Are Also People Who Make Mistakes 2k15 because this fucking site needs to chill, recognize the errors made all around, chill some more, calmly discuss how to avoid future mistakes, chill, move on, and CHILL THE FUCK OUT.

anonymous asked:

Are you going to let the fandom move on from this drama or are you going to keep posting about it? Thank goodness she left and the discussion about her actions has been had. I'd like to move on in the tags and on my dash without drama seekers continuing to fan the flames. This fandom needs to get back to positivity not dwell in the last few weeks of hell

Are you going to keep being a passive aggressive little twit in people’s inboxes?

I’ll talk about whatever I damn well please on my own blog.

BYE.

anonymous asked:

Can you make a post about hating people for having an opinion that differs from yours?

(Same anon) too often i see posts that venimously attack religious people for their beliefs. A lot of those religious people are actually decent people, and don’t deserve the hate they are getting for their beliefs. by outright attacking people like that, discussion is made impossible, and both groups are isolated from eachother. This only reinforces jthe opinions of those who oppress both groups. We need a civil discussion, not a shitstorm.

I’m not sure why you’re coming to us about this considering we have tags dedicated to tone policing, respectability politics, and “reverse oppression” which all clearly indicate we’re not exactly on the side of “every opinion is valid”, or that you have to be nice to people because “it’s just their opinion”, or that “civil discussion” ie not hurting feelings is on higher moral ground when it comes to oppression.

As for religion, it’s one thing when it comes to religious beliefs and rules that harm nobody, but bigotry being a part of your religion doesn’t shield you from being called out nor does it excuse your bigotry.

If you’re referring to the former, yes it’s absolutely ridiculous to get on someone’s case - so they believe in multiple gods, or they have smoking rituals, or they love Jesus, so what? - but it doesn’t sound like that’s what you’re talking about.

And by far it’s not the fault of the oppressed that these beliefs exist, nor are the they responsible for “proving them wrong” or proving we deserve rights. That’s oppressive bullshit right from the get-go in which the privileged try to wriggle out of responsibility for their actions by shifting everything onto the people they abuse.

“Well, you see, you’re not being nice enough, so you don’t get humanity. It’s not on me that I intentionally hinge your rights based on a subjective and finicky line that I’ll constantly move so I don’t have to acknowledge my part in this and instead blame you for the things I do.”

Being a decent person is incompatible with retaining oppressive beliefs. It’s either one or the other, not both. You’re not a decent person if you continue to withhold the rights of the marginalized, especially if you base your treatment of marginalized persons on whether they spoke to you in a way you approve.

- Cougar

anonymous asked:

You actually just said what I failed horribly to say. 'There are two people, they both have needs.' I just see Elsa's needs as being treated like a girlfriend and not NOT being treated as a sex object. If that makes sense. So, yes, Anna is not pushing her for sex, but is she actually trying to step up and be what Elsa needs in the way Elsa is trying to do for her? That's all I was trying to say and I honestly think I did so pretty politely. The tone of your reply (and tags) was unnecessary.

With all due respect, we are not intending to be rude, but the literal meaning of the words you used for your argument readily implies that Anna possessing a polyamorous mentality when it comes to sexuality is wrong. That goes beyond the boundaries of discussing a fic, and starts treading places that can be damaging to real live people.

However politely you say it, that’s a problem, so directness took precedence over politeness.

Now, in terms of the fic, this is hard for both of them. Elsa has tangible proof that Anna has a high sex drive–one that the person she’s maybe-sort of a ‘thing’ with can’t really accommodate fully. Knowing that, she tries to make the concessions she can so that she’s not taking advantage of Anna.

Meanwhile, Anna doesn’t even really get what Elsa wants. That’s part of why she panics when she finds out that Elsa’s asexual. This person she cares about is operating on a spectrum she can’t understand, and she doesn’t want to be taking advantage of that.

Neither one wants to lock the other in a relationship where they’re unhappy.

As far as Anna stepping up, the last chapter of the fic says it better than I care to:

“Knowing she wants to make me this happy, even if it’s in ways that make her uncomfortable? I have to do something about it.”

This chapter, the topic of sex comes up because Anna’s wondering what the boundaries are. It isn’t Elsa giving and giving; she’s thought about the logical progression of Anna’s needs, and she has a game plan for the best way of keeping their thing sane and healthy.

Elsa has a fairly easy route to understanding Anna, frankly. Anna wants sex. Giving her a way to have that makes logical sense (emotionally, it could go sideways, but this in an emotional offering only in that Elsa doesn’t want to deprive Anna).

Elsa, though, is allo to Anna’s aro. Sex is a plainly physical act. There are diagrams explaining how it works. Simple.

Romance doesn’t come with diagrams. Anna has no frame of reference. The ways of meeting Elsa halfway aren’t nearly as obvious as the solution to Anna being interested in sex. I mean, I know we’re stepping away from the ‘keeping score’ commentary, but seriously, Elsa has cheat codes.

And just by being in a relationship Anna doesn’t fully understand, she’s putting herself out there. Stepping out into brand new territory is intimidating, and she’s decided that she’ll give this a shot for Elsa.

They’ve got a mutual anxiety-stretching thing going on.

I want to make one more post, just to clear some things up to my friends.

I never once wanted to insinuate that certain labels and sexualities are not valid. Or that I dislike anyone who is of a certain sexuality or label. I was merely trying to discuss certain rhetorics and discussions that have been passed around this website, and critiquing certain ideas that specific communities on this website have been spreading around. I wasn’t saying that those labels or sexualities are bad, not at all. You are who you are, and to make fun of and be rude to certain people because of their sexuality would be hypocritical of me. 

I’m sorry that I let my discussion and argumentative state of mind get ahead of my personal, intimate community with my friends. I tried to tag certain posts, but clearly that isn’t enough, and I apologize for hurting anyone. I get very defensive and single-minded when it comes to specific reclamation of slurs, and the resources of certain communities. This is a problem that I need to work on- Even now, my pride wants to defend my posts and my mindset, but I know this is wrong.

I do want to make it clear, that whenever I used the word Community in any of those posts, I was being specific to the historic, very present LGBT community. Communities like LGBTQIA and LGBT+ are different, and in general, I wasn’t speaking directly about those communities. This is not an excuse- I still should not have done it. My own personal community of friends and family are a different community than the LGBT community, and I would never purposefully try to single out anyone within my own personal community. 

I do urge people who do try to go into those discussions to please do their research and not just mindlessly reblog rhetoric that hasn’t had a rebuttel. Do research on the history before passing judgement on a very emotional and close to heart subject. I myself have caught myself doing this, and it was wrong me, tagged or not.

I should not have reblogged the textposts that had no context to them to outsiders. I should not have passed judgement on specific text-posts from people I don’t know, and I’m sorry. I’m going to refrain from posting anything more about the entire debacle, unless I get specific questions in my askbox pertaining to the topic. 

Personally, I do believe that I answered the questions I received with a valid mind set, but I understand that not everyone else agrees, and that’s okay. It’s okay to disagree- lgbt matters are very emotional and very heated. But I will still refrain from making anymore posts about it, since I am a minority among my friends and don’t want to hurt them. 

Sometimes words that I assume were clear, aren’t very clear, and can be misinterpreted and cause hurt that I never intended or even thought of when I first wrote it. And this is my fault; I need to be clearer with my words and be more cautious in what I say. I treat this blog like a personal blog, but I have an audience of 1,000 people and I can’t just make callous posts that people who haven’t been doing extensive research like me will understand.

I’ve been in a state of guilt and utter despair for the past 14 hours, just thinking about accidentally hurting someone with my words or the words of a reblogged post.

I’m sorry for hurting anyone.

anonymous asked:

Well do I have news for you. Tumblr search looks through the text content of your posts too, not just tags. You can't just write random nonsense and hope no one will notice. When you publicly put forth accusations against a real person and people call you out on it, dismissing them as getting "worked up" just shows how powerless you are against logic and reason.

Well dear, I haven’t seen any ‘logic’ and ‘reason’ in any comment under my post, so i saw no reason to start a discussion :) You know what they say ‘ Don’t argue with idiots. They’ll drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.’ But please, if you feel the need to point out my mistakes by giving me some ‘logic’ and ‘reasons’ - my ask is all open for you.