Dripping-Violets

her name was Marsha P Johnson, and we have her to thank for so much.

remember, the first Pride was a riot, and she was one of the brave souls who endured it to help carve the path which so many of us walk today. she helped found several activist groups regarding LGBT safety and wellbeing. and she was absolutely radiant, too.

also i may have leaked draculas design

This is the first custom mii that's taken me two days to draw (mostly because I was determined to literally draw every single detail and not simplify any of the mechanical bits)

my hope is that they'll be 9/11's new love interest now that he and Default had their divorce

also here's an old pic of the lucky bachelor for those of you who havent been following my fucked up tomodachi island

"If something immediately makes me feel anger, repulsion, or joy, with even a simple blurb, it's probably manipulating me."

First off, Newsweek is hardly an unbiased source these days. The majority shareholder is Dev Pagrad, is exceptionally wealthy, and has been repeatedly pushing newsweek to be an arm of the right wing's propaganda machine. It is HARD LINE far-right, Anti-trans, anti-woman, anti-immigrant, anti-science To cite the Southern Poverty Law Center (by way of Wikipedia)

In November 2022, the Southern Poverty Law Center reported that Newsweek had "taken a marked radical right turn by buoying extremists and promoting authoritarian leaders" since it hired conservative political activist Josh Hammer as editor-at-large. It noted the magazine's elevation of conspiracy theorists, publication of conspiracy theories about COVID-19, views such as support for a ban on all legal immigration to the United States and denying adults access to trans-affirming medical care, and failure to disclose potential conflicts of interest in the content published on Hammer's opinion section and podcast. https://web.archive.org/web/20221106005834/https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2022/11/04/newsweek-embraces-anti-democracy-hard-right

Newsweek, when even linking to the study it cites, doesn't... actually link to the study. It just links to newsweek's "study" tab. It does MENTION the study, which allowed me to track it down. https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/almost-third-gen-z-men-globally-agree-wife-should-obey-her-husband IPSOS is a MARKETING FIRM, whose CEO Jean Laurent Poitou, was the former head of Accenture, under whose leadership, sure did a lot of fraud, engaging in tax avoidance, and other such conservative-leaning behaviors, and who generally is affiliated with the traditional right. Let's add another one. The group "Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at King’s Business School, King’s College London" just so happens to be at the school that the Current CEO of newsweek is not just an alum of, but is a major contributor to the funding for. It's always weird when something extremely polarizing comes from, a group that's directly funded by the CEO or owner of the conservative newspaper that's publishing it, as well as from research done by a Marketing firm in the pockets of wealthy conservatives! Funny how that always seems to happen! But if we actually look at IPSOS's study, you'll see that a lot of the numbers have been gently massaged and their methodology is EXTREMELY opaque. After all, they're not a scientific institution. They're a MARKETING FIRM. The biggest conclusion if you read their own paper, is ACTUALLY, that MOST PEOPLE seem to hold progressive views on women's autonomy, but think that THEIR COUNTRY still majority holds draconian views on women's autonomy. Things their own study says:

A Majority of Gen Z believes that women shouldn't "always obey" their husbands.

A Majority of Gen Z has concerns that their society holds draconian beliefs about women.

What the results of the SPIN on this facts, as well as how many in the comments are reacting, is actually perpetuating the Traditional Right's views on Gender and Marriage. I need you to understand that it actively benefits the traditional right when you lean into gender essentialism and believe that Men Are Evil. That Men Are Monsters. It makes the default assumption of men be that they will always be predators, meaning that when they DO do something predator, nobody's surprised; well that's just how men are; when he finds the RIGHT woman who can Tame Him, then he'll behave; that's the duty of a woman after all; to put up with men abusing her until she finds one who is the Right One, who she can handle. What this article ALSO does, is scare progressive women, scares queerfolk, scares young folk, and makes conservatives feel emboldened and empowered. You need to ALWAYS, ALWAYS, remind yourself: "If something immediately makes me feel anger, repulsion, or Joy, with even a simple blurb, it's probably manipulating me." And more than that, you need to remember the follow up:

So i would emphasize — if you fell for this, if you let it lead you to despair or anger, do not feel shame. It’s designed to take advantage of very basic human impulses. It’s a weapon designed to target us when we are already scared and tired and hurting. We’re the target. It’s difficult to dodge a trap specifically tailor-made to catch us.

Just remember — if it makes you feel strongly, positive or negative, if your first instinct is a strong emotion, you’re probably walking into a trap. And one of the fastest ways to inoculate yourself against that trap is to ask yourself “who benefits from making me feel this way?”

Eventually, like it did with me above, you’ll get lucky, you’ll “remember your training” (lol), and one of us will manage to recognize a trap for what it is so that we can tell others “hey, it’s not what it seems.”

A common genie trope is "be careful what you wish for", in which your three wishes come with unforeseen consequences (example: wishing to be rich kills a loved one and the money comes from inheritance/life insurance/a settlement of some kind. Wishing that loved one back to life brings them back as a zombie. And un-wishing all of your wishes sends you back in time to the moment just before making your first wish, but without the knowledge/memories of your experiences, trapping you in an endless loop of bad wishes).

But if your first wish could negate that affect, do you then get two good wishes? If you were to wish something like

"I wish that amy mortal, spirit, or creature of any kind that knowingly or unknowingly causes me any harm would suffer the repercussions of those actions instead of me"

Xavier:

Zayne:

Rafayel:

Sylus:

Caleb:

The game treats the Miis like they’re real people and makes zero mention ever that they are not, and only ever refers to them and their POV as if they are real and you are their caretaker! While playing this honestly messed with my head pretty badly at times and made me worry a lot on if I was hurting real people/not doing enough for real people while I was playing!

I cannot imagine how much worse this would be for someone who’s unmedicated, non-dormant, or experiencing breakthrough symptoms! Do please be careful and PLEASE remember to have a way to reality check yourself while playing the game!!!

The reason that this comparison is inaccurate is because humans have the ability to use reason and make logical choices, but cats don’t. Humans see a car coming and wait until the street is clear to cross. Cats don’t. Humans know not to eat strange food on the ground. Cats don’t. Humans can look up which plants are toxic and avoid them. Cats can’t. Humans don’t eat raw rabbits and rodents that may carry disease. Cats do. Humans who hunt follow laws that prevent them from killing endangered species (besides shitty poachers). Cats don’t.

A far more accurate comparison would be a cat and a toddler. They lack the ability to recognize danger and don’t have the ability to reason that an adult does. I’m sure a toddler would have a great time roaming around the neighborhood, but no one is going to argue in favor of that. People can understand that doing that is irresponsible and dangerous. But no sane person is going to lock their toddler inside and provide them with nothing to do; no one is saying we should do that for cats either. Play with them. Provide cat trees. Rotate their toys. Give them puzzle feeders. And if you want them to go outside you can leash train them. Or build a catio. The options aren’t let them roam vs. never provide them with entertainment. If it is unbearable to entertain and care for a cat that is kept indoors, you probably shouldn’t own a cat.

Would you let your dog roam? Or your bird? How about your rabbit? I’m sure all of these animals would have a great time running (or flying) around the neighborhood, but we generally recognize that this is a bad idea. It’s no different for cats. We are caretakers for our animals, so it is up to us to use our big brains to make logical choices about what they should or shouldn’t do. We have the ability to understand the risks associated with free roaming. Cats don’t. We can weigh risks and benefits before making a decision. Cats can’t.

I’ve seen two cats who were roadkill, multiple poisoned rats that make easy prey, gardens full of poisonous (to cats) plants, and a cat at the vet who survived his arm being mauled by a fox through a catio. Yet people still do it. I’m in a small village, no idea how much worse in a bigger place it would be.

It is entirely cultural. Sadly, it also means people don’t tend to play with their pets and let them free roam as their only enrichment. So they baulk at how “bored” a cat would be indoors. Forgetting it’s not just kittens who need playtime. You are seen as a “weirdo” for harness/lead training a cat here, which I don’t agree with obviously.

Most rescues will not let you adopt a cat if you do not let it be indoor-outdoor. They will even check up on your garden to see it’s safety (like a cat can’t jump a fence lol). Charities do this, too.

I still keep my cat indoors only. My step mum thought I was being cruel until I explained to her the dangers of a cat outside.

Across the pond in New Zealand ONE SINGLE CAT drove an entire species to extinction. There are still arseholes over there but they’re generally even stricter than we are here in Oz.

Our grandparents tell us stories about the birds that used to be here and how the seasons were predictable and the weather less extreme.

HM

"Absolutely no one comes to save us but us."

(The best of this post and its reblogs, but with links that work)

Here is a website where you can scroll down to all the different levels of the ocean 

Here is a website where you can see the future of the universe

Here is a website where you can press a ‘make everything okay’ button, over and over, until things really are okay

Here is a website that you can read if you feel like a burden

Here is a website where you can look at strobe illusions (TW strobe/flashing)

Here is a website where you can cut stuff up (TW blood/sh)

Here and here are websites where you can play with sand

Here is a website where you can draw with macaroni and other fun foods

Here is a website where you can paint someone’s nails

Here is a website where you can grow a garden with emojis

Here is a website with hundreds of videos of people hugging you (rightfully dubbed ‘the nicest place on the internet’ because it really is, y’all, it made me cry)

Here is a website that will take you to other useless websites

Here is a website where you can make a tiny cat play bongo drums (and other instruments!)

Here is a website to help give you gentle reminders <3

Here is a website where you can grow a tiny farm

Here is a website where you can take a bunch of scientific personality tests

Here is a website of calm rain noise

via @discipleofkleio

Just a few important and gentle reminders:

🫶🏻 DO NOT WATCH THIS FUCKING SHOW 🫶🏻

If you claim you support human rights - not just trans rights but human rights in general - yet still plan to watch this show, unfollow me. You’re a fucking hypocrite and I don’t want you following me.

Do not watch it even if you’re hate watching it, it still contributes to streaming revenue and views!

The adults in this reboot of the franchise are FULLY accountable for choosing to do this show and accepting a pay cheque over supporting a minority group. Even if they claim they support trans rights, they’re cowards and don’t actually support them at all.

The kids do NOT deserve abuse or hate, whether it’s because you’re comparing them to Dan/Rupert/Emma or because you’re boycotting due to the author’s views. They are literal CHILDREN.

So they train them from an early age that they should always be distracting themselves with something as to not be in the way or annoying the adults.

That's really it. You'd probably have gotten similar results 30 years ago if you studied kids who are left to read books by themselves alone in their room for multiple hours a day vs kids whose parents read with them, or at least in the same room and talk to them about what they're reading. Because the former are most definitely also being neglected in other ways.