fox socks

The reblog chain is one of the things that makes Tumblr unlike anywhere else. All the notes on reblogs are attributed to the original post, no matter which branch people actually liked or reblogged. We want to keep encouraging conversations, and give contributors the recognition they deserve. 

Soon, you'll be able to like, reblog, or reply to any part of a reblog chain, and that note will go to that reblog's author. Each reblog will have its own counts, instead of one aggregated number from every version of the post. And yes, you’ll be able to like multiple posts in one chain.

If a reblog doesn't add anything, the love flows up to the last person in the chain who did. Your post doesn't lose notes just because people spread it quietly.

Past notes will stay on the original post — we're only changing what happens from here on out. Retroactively re-attributing all of them would be... a lot.

As this rolls out over the next few days and you explore it, we’ll keep reading your replies and reblogs, so please keep sharing your questions, concerns, and ideas.

Your creativity has always been the heart of Tumblr, whether you’re the original poster or adding something brilliant in the reblogs, and nothing about this change is meant to limit that.

This is genuinely one of the most infuriating things I've read about recently. This girl just straight up DIDN'T DO THE ASSIGNMENT. Then complained about discrimination because the person grading it was trans.

She got a ZERO because she didn't do the assignment. She didn't even properly CITE her source, which was the bible. There is absolutely a proper way to cite the bible, btw. And she didn't do it.

This was the assignment, btw:

She did not do almost ANYTHING this assignment required. She deserved that zero.

this was the TA's reaction, btw:

"Please note that I am not deducting points because you have certain beliefs, but instead I am deducting point for you posting a reaction paper that does not answer the questions for this assignment, contradicts itself, heavily uses personal ideology over empirical evidence in a scientific class, and is at times offensive. "While you are entitled to your own personal beliefs, there is an appropriate time or place to implement them in your reflections. I encourage all students to question or challenge the course material with other empirical findings or testable hypotheses, but using your own personal beliefs to argue against the findings of not only this article, but the findings of countless articles across psychology, biology, sociology, etc. is not best practice. "You argue that abiding by normative gender roles is beneficial (it is perfectly fine to believe this), but to then say that everyone should act the same, while also saying that people aren't pressured into gendered expectations is contradictory, especially since your arguments reflect a religious pressure to act in gender-stereotypical ways. You can say that strict gender norms don't create gender stereotypes, but that isn't true by definition of what a stereotype is. Please not that acknowledging gender stereotypes does not immediately denote a negative connotation, a nuance this article discusses. "Additionally, to call an entire group of people "demonic" is highly offensive, especially a minoritized population. You are entitled to your own beliefs, but this isn't a vague narrative of "society pushes lies," but instead the result of countless years developing psychological and scientific evidence for these claims and directly interacting with the communities involved. You may personally disagree with this, but that doesn't change the fact that every major psychological, medical, pediatric, and psychiatric association in the United States acknowledges that, biologically and psychologically, sex and gender is neither binary nor fixed. "I implore you apply some more perspective and empathy in your work. If you personally disagree with the findings, then by all means share your criticisms, but make sure to do so in a way that is appropriate and using the methodology of empirical psychology, as aligned with the learning goals in this class. If you have any additional questions or concerns about this or would like some additional educational resources, I would be happy to discuss this further and provide you with them."

(all typos are mine, I had to type it out from screenshots in this article, which ALSO CONTAINS THE WHOLE ESSAY SHE WROTE)

Can we talk about how PERFECT this response is? This TA did their due diligence when grading this paper. The essay? It was hot garbage. I read the whole thing.

The other instructor for this course AGREED WITH THE TA!

"Samantha, I am the other instructor for this course, and I have also take the time to read your paper. I concur with [redacted] on the grade you received. This paper should not be considered as a completion of the assignment. "Everyone has different ways in which they see the world, but in an academic course such as this you are being asked to support your ideas with empirical evidence and higher-level reasoning. "I find it concerning that you state at the beginning of your paper that you do not think bullying ("teasing") is a bad thing. In addition, your paper directly and harshly criticizes your peers and their opinions, which are just as valuable as yours. Disagreeing with others is fine, but there is a respectful way to go about it. That goes for discussion posts as well as reaction papers. "Please employ more thoughtfulness in your future assignment."

There is genuinely no reason, at all, for this TA to be placed on leave. The TA was just doing their goddamned job.

As someone who had to write all kinds of essays about all kinds of things in high school (and in college, but that's somehow less relevant to this). I was able to write about being pro-gay marriage (before it was legalized in the US), being pro-abortion and being LGBTQIA+ AT A CATHOLIC SCHOOL. And I still managed to get As. Do you want to know how? I used real sources and cited them. I actually followed the assignment while still getting my point across.

It is absolutely possible to write essays disagreeing with the premise without completely flouting the assignment. I promise you it's possible.

I could vent about this for HOURS. That's how much it pisses me off.

The essay is intentionally bad. You cannot write an essay that bad unintentionally, and even if you could, you would not then cry discriminating for being part of the biggest religious group in the US.

This woman saw that she had a trans woman in front of her and decided to try and ruin that trans woman's life to kickstart her own career in the reactionary talk show and podcast circuit. She already had an appearance on Fox, iirc.

It failed to cite sources, which should be an instant academic dishonesty fail

It didn’t extensively refer to the article it was responding to, only the broad strokes view that you could get from the title.

THEN it was based on personal belief instead of academic rigor, insulted and dehumanized an entire population, and advocated for bullying (this last should be an academic REMOVAL from the school by most policy sets).

The sharpest, best-trained pilots make worse decisions when they're tired or sick or stressed out, so there's two of them. The most dedicated and experienced air traffic controllers garble an instruction over the radio sometimes, so pilots are trained to always repeat clearances back to catch misunderstandings quickly. The best and brightest maintenance mechanic still overlooks a screw or misconnects a wire once or twice in her career, so aircraft systems are built with two or three or four layers of redundancy, and pilots are exhaustively trained to deal with failures safely. 

I haven't spent my whole life responding to people being rude, or stupid, or dangerous with knee jerk compassion. It's a new habit. The first time I did that as the lead for my lab, it was because the guy genuinely was so good natured that I knew something had to be off. But the other two times were just me going, alright, lets see if it always goes this well, and so far, it has. I'm almost 30, and I just figured out that the #1 reason people are shitty are because they are going through shit.

I don't think you have, like, a moral obligation to respond to people being jerks with knee jerk compassion. But it has made my life so much easier the last four months that I would recommend trying. For your own sake. Please.

DO YOU REMEMBER? THE 21ST NIGHT OF SEPTEMBER?

And then he said, “The important thing is to find something you feel good about doing.”

That phrasing struck me. “Something you feel good about doing”. Most people would have phrased it as “something you enjoy doing”. Or “something you’re good at doing”. But Mr. Rogers’ subtly different phrasing leads to a profoundly different connotation. “Something you feel good about doing” may not be enjoyable–people who work in hospitals or in disaster zones might not enjoy much of their day, but they probably feel good about helping people. “Something you feel good about doing“ may not be something you’re particularly good at–you may be a terrible artist by any objective standard, but if you feel good about making your art, then it’s a worthwhile endeavor. Looking for “something you feel good about doing” can help you find a truly satisfying life path.

Jay has a great article on this and outlines things you can do to show the corporations that rolled over for Trump that you don’t approve of censorship