Triflers need not apply

They want to act like high levels of sickness whether it be airborne or foodborne are normal and not the responsibility of agencies like public health or food safety regulation so they can get away with dismantling them.

Found a video of a girl showing off Diet Soda detector strips (if there's any diabaddies that see this and want it I can link them, they're super helpful), and half of the comments were "you're diabetic you should just be drinking water..." First of all, not only are you just wrong, but you seriously expect diabetics to just never enjoy themselves? Ever?.

Saw another comment under a video about type 1 saying "you did this to yourselves. you ate too much sugar and you got yourself into this situation." And it's just so funny because they're Wrong™️. Type one diabetes is autoimmune and fully hereditary, and not at all effected by diet.

I mean, I know the answer. It's diet culture. People on their fancy diets think they're a superior human being because other people are "unhealthier" than them, and they hear diabetes and think "big fat and lazy with a bad diet" and think they're allowed to walk all over them since they're so superior. Despite the fact that it's a completely false stereotype that doesn't apply to most diabetics.

A lot of type 2's start out as hypoglycemic -- their pancreas is over-producing insulin, causing blood sugar crashes. Insulin stuffs sugar into fat cells, causing people to get fat, if there's too much of it. The overproduction of insulin is a response to slow-growing insulin resistance. Because sugar is a vital part of human energy, people who cannot easily process sugar due to insulin resistance and insulin over-response may crave sugar in order to have enough energy to function.

And now going back to the top point, I know exactly what video op is referring to and she made a different video a few weeks prior specifically about harmful comments to t1d’s and instead of getting the point, heaps of comments were basically to the effect of “but we can bully t2ds bc they brought this on themselves, they deserve to be mocked”. HUH. DO YOU HEAR YOURSELVES.

A violent reminder 💖💜💙

Edit because biphobes keep trying to hijack this post with their ignorance and I'm sick and fucking tired of it:

buffy (suspicious): and why do you know about romantic poetry

Simultaneously, I’m an adult who, in my spare time, enjoys engaging in adult fiction spaces. As a result of that, I have, unfortunately, been shouted at a decent number of times by young adults (18-25 seems to be the common range) about children, and their well being, and how what happens in adult fiction spaces causes harm to children, and themselves by proxy. (I’ve also been yelled at by actual children, but I’m happy to ignore them, given many of them have been influenced by the previously mentioned young adults to behave that way.)

“Grooming” isn’t truly a technical term, though my industry uses it as one often. It doesn’t have a precise definition or pattern of behavior beyond “inappropriate conduct with a child.” It’s had other uses, of course, like saying someone was “groomed to inherit a title” or similar. But generally what we mean online is “this has to do with child abuse.”

Children are, no joke, one of the most uniquely oppressed classes of human being in the world. Most of the time, they simply have no recourse, no legal right to self-advocate, no ability to retain counsel, choose their own living environment, what they do, how they dress, what they eat. To even report their own abuse — which I assure you, most children are perfectly aware is abuse — they must first be believed by an adult, who may then choose to do something on the child’s behalf, or not. Any option a child has for safety or freedom of choice is entirely dependent on an adult deigning to humor them in the first place.

When you turn the age of majority in your country, you are automatically given a new set of legal and social rights. Even a severely disabled adult, in most places, may advocate for their rights on the basis of their legal adulthood. (There are constant failures here by the legal system, of course, but the point is that you are allowed to advocate in the first place.) You become a different class of person, who can do and ask for things that children are simply not allowed to.

When you try to say that “adults can be groomed,” by bringing up all kinds of random possibilities like “well what about cults” “what about age gaps and different levels of life experience” “what about this or that,” you’re still ignoring the idea that the exploited adult has recourse, in those situations (again, leaving out that there are many failings with the system that allows that recourse does not eliminate the fact that recourse is an option.) Restraining orders. Moving away. Going no contact, with no parent to force you to continue to see that person on holidays. Even if you are young, you are not helpless. You have an agency allowed to you that children simply are not given.

Of course, an 18 year old can be abused and exploited. And I absolutely am wary of a 19 year old dating a 40 year old — personally, I question the shit out of that. I’d even suspect that that 19 year old was previously groomed in some way. But the distinction is important to me, here, not to diminish the abuse that young adults can face, but to ensure that the plight of children is properly understood.

purity politics