the most accurate of all statements

About Their Ages

Heterosexual Couple (Characters Aged 5 and 6)

People: Awwwwwwwwwwwww! They’re so cute!

Homosexual Ship (Characters Aged 13 and 14)

People: Ermahgerd! Stop sexualizing teh childrenz!!!1!!!1!

But wait, there’s more!

Heterosexual Couple (Characters Aged 11-12ish?)

People: Wooooo! So precious! Get it, girl!

And the real kicker…

Heterosexual Couple (Characters Aged 13 and 14ish?)

People: It’s so sweet I’ve got cavities! They’re so adorable together!! <3

Literally the same girl from the gay ship.

She kisses a boy on screen and everyone cheers. People suggest that the hand-holding and eye-contact between her and another female character looks kind of romantic and suddenly it’s all, “Whoa, calm down! They’re 12 years old!”

Our society likes to equate LGBT+ with 18+ and that’s just not accurate. To assume that identifying as LGBT+ is an inherently mature sexual statement is a fallacy.

As with most aspects of human identity, some people realize their orientation at a very young age. Other people might spend their whole lives coming to understand who they are. Both are valid experiences.

But a thirteen year old girl with a girlfriend should not be regarded any differently than a 13 year old girl with a boyfriend. The same goes for a boy with a boyfriend. Identifying as gay should not be equated with having gay sex. Love at that age, whether between a boy and a boy, a boy and a girl, or a girl and a girl, should continue to be seen as innocent and sweet. To say that two girls being in love is inappropriate for their age is to sexualize them.

How often do people use age as an argument against straight ships? I think most of us can recognize that this imagined concern is actually rooted in homophobia. The people who make these kinds of arguments may not even be conscious of it, because that homophobia is so deeply internalized in our society, but that’s what it boils down to. There will always be shippers who disagree with each other. To argue against a ship is pretty much par for the course on the internet. However, it’s important that straight ships and non-straight ships be treated equally.

tl;dr -

This has been flying off the handle and delivering a PSA when I should be sleeping. We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.

Really helpful tip for writing concise, as-accurate-to-what-you-intend-to-convey statements as possible.

I came up with this method today. I’m writing an artist statement for an interview at a local studio/gallery. ITS THE MOST FRUSTRATING THING IVE EVER HAD TO WRITE because I have to keep it short and direct and be as verbally on point about describing my work as I can, in a way that’s creative and gets received in the way I want it to be.


open a document, turn on bullet points and start making a list of ALL THE WORDS you think could portray your thing/idea/identity/material. Make them all one word if you can, and keep writing those little shits until you’re plum out of ideas THEN here is what you do.

you open google images, you type in each word one at a time. (If you’re like me and your’re writing an artist statement most of those words will be either descriptive, or a physical thing like a canvas).

 LOOK at what images Google puts at the top of the page for this word. Do these images relate closely, or incite in you the feel you’re trying to convey? if not, scratch the world off from your list, if it does, HIGHLIGHT and move on to the next word. 

WHY DO THIS?  narrow down your list to the words? you want to use only the ones will have the highest probability of getting the reader to have an as accurate an impression from reading your work as you desired. Google is indicative of what most people are likely to associate a word with, so it’s good for this purpose.

For example: I wanted to use the word perplex to describe how this aspect of a painting might make the viewer question it. I googled the word and here is what I got:

meh…some guys scratching their heads and cheesy graphics…that is not the tone I want to convey. So i went to an online thesaurus website to see what other words could more appropriately correlate to my intended meaning.

I found mystify, and I searched it.

This is so much closer to the feel I was going for, that I kept the word to include later in my statement. This method is quite effective I would say. YOU HAVE TO ALWAYS KEEP IN MIND WHEN WRITING even though words mean generally the same thing, the cultural context of a word, and by extension the idea it conveys, is ever-changing.

aboycalledsean  asked:

nice to know that your finished? since this is your last theory, were you aiming to discuss all aspects of the show?

I won’t use the term “all” because that’s a big promise, but “most” is more accurate. I will say now: Wren and Sara Harvey are two characters that I just can’t work out (in terms of their motives/involvement in the plot) - so don’t expect much on them although their names do pop up in it. There’s one particular part I’m just dying to share. I make all these bold statements and people will be like “what? Not happening” and then I hit them with the evidence haha

A Dinosaur A Day Mission Statement

This blog is dedicated to depicting dinosaurs as real animals 

To inspire excitement and wonder about everything from the most obscure taxa to modern birds which we know infinite amounts about 

To questioning our preconceived notions of dinosaurs in favor of understanding their biology as it was

To educating individuals on evolutionary biology, cladistics, paleontology, behavior, and of course, feathers 

To making accurate dinosaurs “cool” in the face of competing media presentations

To having fun with science 



To describe every single damn genus of dinosaur, one day at a time, until I get through all of them 

(Yup, even birds) 

Sorry quick rant

Okay so my boyfriend’s roommate is devoutly Christian and we all got into this debate about God and religion, yada yada. ANYway, this kid literally believes that there is no evidence for evolution, there are “zero holes in Christianity” and that Noah was a real person who actually lived for 900 years. He explicitly stated that A) eveything in the bible is a FACT and that it’s all accurate bc “someone wrote it down” and B) that we all actually stemmed from Adam and Eve, who ate the apple bc some talking snake told her to do it.

I’m sorry but that is probably one of the MOST ridiculous things I’ve ever heard. I’m not bashing his right to freely practice his religion, but to claim that all of it actually took place within history is simply ignorant.

The statement, “God created the world in 7 days” makes absolutely no sense. What constituted a day before humans existed? If God is supposedly omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient, wouldn’t he have arguably been able to create the world in 1 day? Does Santa Claus ACTUALLY go to every single house on christmas eve, squeeze through people’s chimneys and windows to deliver effing presents? If Mary was a virgin and was unwillingly impregnated, would that mean God raped her? How can Christians pick and choose what is a sin and what is no longer valid as a sin? The Bible also says wearing two different kinds of fabrics at the same time is a Christians acknowledge this? Absolutely not.

There are countless discrepancies within the Bible and so many illogical concepts and stories associated with it that it seriously makes me question how any of these people made it past 7th grade.

Detail of ‘Familiar Flowering Plants’ from Funk & Wagnalls New “Standard” Dictionary of the English Language Upon Original Plans Designed to Give, in Complete and Accurate Statement, in the Light of the Most Recent Advances in Knowledge, in the Readiest Form for Popular Use, the Orthography, Pronunciation, Meaning, and Etymology of All the Words, and the Meaning of Idiomatic Phrases, in the Speech and Literature of the English-Speaking Peoples, Together with Proper Names of All Kinds, the Whole Arranged in One Alphabetical Order. Prepared by More Than Three Hundred and Eighty Specialists and Other Scholars Under the Supervision of Isaac K. Funk, D.D., L.L.D., Editor-in-Chief; Calvin Thomas, L.L.D., Consulting Editor; Frank H. Vizetelly, Litt.D., L.L.D., Managing Editor. This Edition Supervised by Charles Earle Funk, Litt.D. Complete in One Volume. New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1952.