Think about how much you love the little gay people in your phone. It's nice right?
You are the little gay person in someone else's phone. Peace and love ect.
im also a little gay person in someones phone?

Think about how much you love the little gay people in your phone. It's nice right?
You are the little gay person in someone else's phone. Peace and love ect.
im also a little gay person in someones phone?
bitch
honestly this post only got funnier with the change in format
my xkit makes it the old format so
You would think that the biggest risk of trying out something new is that you won't like it, but it's when it's so good it raises your standards where the real problems start
"out of provolone? How am I supposed to eat a sandwich without provolone?" - girl who put provolone on her sandwich for the first time this week
there is a very real tendency of teenagers with anxiety disorders self diagnosing with considerably more stigmatized and impairing mental illnesses (e.g. schizophrenia, DID, personality disorders), but the best response to that isn't to get angry with them for "appropriating" lol. instead you show them coping resources for the problems they're actually having and deemphasize diagnostic categories in general. if an 18 year old is claiming to have alzheimer's, they're probably making an innocent mistake and are in genuine distress. be kind.
Also I think this trend comes, at least in part, from how brushed aside anxiety disorders can be. If your parents and teachers dismiss you with 'oh everyone feels anxious', then inevitably you're going to start thinking that there must be something else going on with you
”You must feel very scared right now; let’s talk about how to help you personally, tailored to your symptoms” will always be more helpful than “stop faking (X) for attention”. If theyre that desperate for attention or an explanation, something is wrong.
And like, at least some of them are probably right. Yeah these disorders are less common than things like anxiety disorders, but they are more common than you think they are. Like, they probably shouldn't self diagnose without doing a reasonable amount of research and talking to a professional if possible, but not every single one of them is wrong, and being wrong about something is not the same thing as lying about having something you don't. Be nice to teenagers they're still learning
i think people in the middle ages acutally did know how to make photorealistic drawings they just chose not to because it’s funnier to draw some fucked up creature
they actually did make photorealistic drawings things just looked different back then
idk jokes just dont become unfunny to me. i love literally repeating the same thing over and over again. i may get bored eventually but never seriously annoyed
i rely on templates to be social a lot actually. a lot of time hanging out with friends means repeating the same phrase to eachother over and over again
many such phrases
many such phrases
Never forget that Dracula, one of the most iconic villains in all of media, is first introduced wearing a fake beard and a big hat to pretend to be his own carriage driver
Hey he's working with what he has, okay. 😆
abed my very favorite person who doesnt exist but he does in my head
SOBBING ALOUD
my main requirement in a partner is someone who's willing to "yes, and" me. if i say something completely insane i need them to just pick that up and run with it and commit to the bit until we wind up with a conversation that's funny to us but completely incoherent to everyone within earshot. actually now that i'm typing this out i've realised my ideal relationship might just be "shitty improv comedy duo"
i went to a tiny counterserve diner once and accidentally poured sugar instead of salt all over my hashbrowns and was eating them sadly anyways. the waitress took them away and started making me another one and I tried to protest, but she just snorted and said "we're not catholic here". now every time i'm doing something painful out of obligation i think about how that is not repenting, this body is not a catholic establishment, there is no nobility in suffering.
So I'm putting this here as a sort of public service. If you have never seen a rabid animal before, and you think you can handle watching it, I think it's a good idea to watch this. It's pretty upsetting to watch, so big CW on it, because this animal is essentially "dead but still moving." This is end-stage rabies. There is no saving this animal.
Before this stage, animals may be excessively affectionate or oddly tame-looking which is part of the reason why seeing people feeding foxes is upsetting to me. These animals might be, or might become, rabid, and there's no way to know without testing, which involves destroying the animal. Encouraging wild animals to be that close to humans is generally bad.
I grew up in the woods, so unfortunately we saw an uptick in rabid animals every spring -- you'd hear there was a rabid bat in this neighborhood or a rabid fox in this one -- but as wild animals and humans cross over more and more, we will see this more and more.
Opossums and squirrels extremely rarely get rabies, and we don't know why. They think the low body temperature of opossums inhibits the virus. The most common animals which get rabies in the US are raccoons, skunks, bats and foxes. Any animal 'acting unusually' -- not skittish around humans, biting at the air or at nothing ('fly-biting'), walking strangely (they kind of look like they have a string attached to their heads and walk kind of diagonal like they're being pulled along, a lot of the time) -- should be treated as though it's potentially rabid.
If you think you have been exposed to a rabid animal, including 'waking up in a room where a bat has gotten into it and there's a fucking bat in your room', please immediately go to the emergency room. Do not pass go, do not collect $200. Post-exposure prophylaxis absolutely fucking sucks, it is a series of shots you'll have to get in two stages, it's done by weight, and it feels fucking nasty, but rabies is 100% fatal. I cannot stress enough how essential this is, having been through it.
Thank you for reading, I love everybody, the end.
To be clear, I have been through post-exposure prophylaxis for rabies. In 2005 or early 2006, I forget which exactly, @urbanprole and I woke up with a bat in our bedroom bc our apartment maintenance hadn't closed up the HVAC system after replacing filters. I shooed the bat out with a broom and it was acting normally for a bat but we didn't take any chances. (Thankfully, MK was at her dad's that weekend.)
I felt absolutely wretched the next day - the worst I've ever felt, excluding surgery and childbirth - after each series of shots. I had to get 2 sets on different days. I got 8 shots the first day, and Emet got like 13 or 15 bc she's very tall, and it's done by mass. The only thing I can think to compare it to is the depths of COVID, but without the coughing. Your immune system is Working Hard to update itself so it can recognize and fight any possible exposure.
I basically laid in bed and ached and sweated and groaned, but after it was over, I was fine.
Fewer than 20 people have ever survived rabies, and none are known to have survived without immediate post-exposure prophylaxis. Do not fuck around with this. Do not approach strange stray or wild mammals, especially without protective clothing.
Several comments on this post talking about 'why can't the US eradicate rabies entirely' and my friends, it can be really hard to understand how fucking big the United States is, and how weird it is to have basically 50 small countries in a trenchcoat. Like, we're fighting each other right now in courts over medicine, for one thing, and for another...
Like, one of the people commenting on this post and wondering this is from Portugal. Portugal is 35,603 square miles, and the United States is 3.97 million square miles. Portugal is 0.0093% the size of the United States, which... yeah. Like. The single state that I grew up in (Pennsylvania) is 46K square miles.
So, like, for one thing, this country is trying not to explode while a small group of people try to make it explode. And for another?
The US? Is. Fucking. Huge.
Australia doesn't have Rabies, because as far as I'm aware it just never got here and we work hard to keep it that way.
No need to be afraid of bats, just appreciate them from a distance... They're wild animals. If you find a bat in distress call a ranger.
I’ve spent the last two weeks trying to convince coworkers starting a bat-box monitoring project that, even if they don’t intend to handle bats, they should get their rabies vaccinations.
bats are the only reservoir species for rabies here, and it has a pretty low prevalence. so is it likely they’re going to come in physical contact with a bat? not really. is it likely any bat they come in contact with will have rabies? also no.
but it only takes one, and pre-exposure vaccine is WAY less of a trial than post-exposure (and if, for some reason, you are exposed and DON’T get a post-exposure vax, then you’re dead).
As a wildlife professional mentioned, you should get post-exposure prophylaxis regardless of whether you have a vaccine or not if you're exposed. The vaccine is just to raise your chances if your risk level is high.
For a confirmed direct exposure, like a bite from a wild carnivore, yeah - sorry, I should have clarified that. In that case, what pre-exposure vaccination does is decrease the number of post-exposure doses required - 2 shots versus 4 or 5 vaccine + RabIg.
(I have it on good authority that the reaction from two doses post-exp is much gentler than to 4-5 plus immunoglobulin.)
Indirect transmission is so rare, though, that pre-exposure vaccination with regular titer checks is considered protective for workers in environments where incidental/indirect exposures could take place, in concert with PPE.
Yeah that would have been nice when I had mine. IDK if the dosing has changed but I got 8 shots and @urbanprole got thirteen.
(She's 6'8" and built like a brick house tho.)
It was pretty awful.
Adding from the notes because i think this is important
rabies shots are hyped up as being like so scary that people will avoid seeking treatment because they're "Probably" fine and people need to know that it's no where near as horrific as everyone says
Horror stories have the potential to cause needless death
You know, it occurs to me that the known internet phenomenon of Reddit “am I the asshole?” posts having completely misleading headers is actually a really great example of a far less known but far more common practice of extreme journalistic spin in cases where there are large monetary incentives to diminish the story in question.
Like, if you see a Reddit post titled “Am I the asshole for buying my wife a new dress?”, the post is pretty much always something totally deranged like: “I (48) really dislike the way my wife (20) dresses, because I think it’s too revealing and makes her look slutty, which was fine when we started dating five years ago, but it makes me feel like she’s going to cheat on me now that we’re married. I’ve politely asked her to get new clothes multiple times, and every time she refused because she said she liked her clothes, and didn’t want to waste money buying new ones. Yesterday I couldn’t take it anymore so I threw out a bunch of her old dresses and bought her a new one that was more modest looking. She started crying because one of the dresses I threw out had been left to her by her mom who died when she was a teen, but I couldn’t have known that it had sentimental value. She said that I should have asked, but obviously if I asked she’d have just told me not to throw out any of her clothes, including the ones that weren’t sentimental. Also, the more modest dress I bought was pretty expensive, and she never thanked me for it. Am I the asshole here, or is she being unreasonable?”
Similarly, whenever you see a headline like “Woman Wins Millions From McDonald’s Because Her Hot Coffee Was Too Hot”, if you dig a bit, you’ll almost always quickly find out that what actually happened was: A 79-year-old ordered coffee which, unbeknownst to her, was being served extremely dangerously hot, because McDonald’s was trying to have coffee that stayed warm over a long commute without spending any extra money on cups with better insulation. The coffee spilled on the old woman’s lap, giving her severe third degree burns over a huge portion of her body, including her genitals. She got to a hospital and they managed to save her life with skin grafting, but she became disabled from the accident, and her genitals and thighs were permanently disfigured. She tried to settle with McDonald’s for her medical costs, and McDonald’s refused to cover any portion of her medical expenses at all, and so she sued. At trial, the jury discovered that this same exact thing had happened seven hundred times before, and McDonald’s had still decided not to change their policy because paying out individual suits was cheaper than moderately reducing their coffee profits. As a result, the jury awarded punitive damages designed to penalize McDonald’s two days worth of their coffee profits, in addition to the woman’s medical costs.
I think it’s largely the same phenomenon, but I know a lot of people who are familiar with the first case, but don’t know to look for the second. If you see some totally outrageous “how could a person ever sue over this stupid thing?” case, you should immediately be incredibly suspicious that that’s all that actually happened, because a lot of the time, it absolutely isn’t. The people who have the most incentive to make their opponent look not only wrong, but completely crazy for having any sort of grievance at all, are often the actually unreasonable ones.
just saw a post where someone put “detrans dni” and like… hey we should be supporting detransitioned people bc if we don’t terfs will
sometimes you’re wrong about your identity and that’s ok like i used to think i was bi but it turns out i was wrong and i know ppl who thought they were trans but it turns out they were wrong and it should be ok and accepted that sometimes people don’t get it right on the first try
@shadowknight1224 this is an excellent way of putting it thank you
This touches on something I have felt for a long time, which is that one of the reasons rigid queer labels and gatekeeping is so dangerous is because if you want to encourage people to explore their gender/sexuality, there has to be a safe "Actually I was wrong" option.
I went through so very much anxiety coming out, and when I really think about it it was squarely from the fear of being wrong about it all. That I was, at heart, a cishet woman, and therefore I was appropriating a label that didn't 'belong' to me, and I would (somehow) be harming other people by doing so. There's so much more unnecessary pressure if the sword hanging over your head is "But you do have to be right about this, you can't back out once you've even asked the question."
I think that is Bad. I think it makes fewer people ask the question. I think that includes those who need to ask, and would be much happier for it.
to summarize: one of the things the Q stands for is QUESTIONING
and that is as it should be
I’d like to also submit the possibility that some people may be more prone to shifts in their gender identity than others, and that it’s not necessarily even a case of being “wrong,” so much as it’s a case of just changing over time. I know the predominant narrative we see in discourse is that a person who transitions was never their agab—and I’m sure that’s true for a lot of people! But… it’s not true everyone? I remember reading an interview with Danny Lavery after he came out, and he said something along the lines of “One day, I went to bed a woman and woke up not a woman anymore.” So if a person can change once, who’s to say that can’t change again? For example, I know Eddie Izzard (whose labels have shifted a lot over the decades, as terminology and options for gender identities identity have changed many times over since the 1980s) has said she goes through long block periods of being a particular gender, so right now she’s “based in girl mode,” (her words) but she’s previously had blocks of time being based in “boy mode,” too. So like, whose to say other people don’t have block periods like that? Maybe somebody really was non-binary for ten years and now they’re not anymore, y’know? Not feeling something about yourself forever doesn’t have to mean you were wrong the whole time. Of course, being wrong is okay too! But I’d make room for both.
i LOVE this addition, especially because it helps us move away from the "ive always known" narrative that dominates so much trans space. sometimes your gender literally changes, and it's not helpful or healthy of us to act like that means everything that came before was false or mistaken.
Summary: it's ok to be wrong. It's ok to make readjustments along the way.
fat tummy peeking out from the bottom of someone's shirt should receive the same appreciation that's given to tasteful cleavage in a low-cut top or a little bit of asscheek poking out from tiny shorts. this would improve society