i made my first uquiz, and it is regrettably a tumblr history exam. this counts for 30% of your final grade so make it count

I love the generational gap between emoji usage. Anyone over 50 sees 🙃 and thinks “silly time! whee 🙃”, whereas the rest of us immediately hear, verbatim, “they ask you how you are, and you just have to say that you’re fine, when you’re not really fine, but you just can’t get into it because they would ne–”

Flying the flag upside down is a distress signal

no one’s saying you can’t write about dark subjects, just don’t publicly post content that paints abusive shit as romantic/desirable. that’s it. you wanna write a story that includes abuse? cool. you wanna write a story that romanticizes abuse, make no sort of disclaimer making it clear that it’s NOT desirable, and then post it where anyone could find it? not cool. I know way too many people who’ve fallen into abusive situations because media has convinced them that shit is healthy. write whatever you want but please just be fucking responsible with it.

Nope. No one can or should expect you to spell out that abuse is wrong. It’s assumed, if you’re tagging “abuse cw”, that you understand that abuse is wrong. That’s why you’re tagging it–because you know it’s a trigger and that people should be able to avoid. Tagging, and tagging properly, is the full extent of responsibility required by authors. It’s completely absurd to assume that an author writing something dark and messed up doesn’t know it’s dark and messed up, and I’m baffled as to why so many people do assume that kind of thing. Please go to a public library. There are no disclaimers explaining the author’s intentions. Sometimes, hundreds of years after an author’s death, people are STILL arguing about whether an author was romanticizing or calling out various tropes. That’s what makes literature what it is–you have to think critically about it. (And on that note! It is NOT obvious whether someone is romanticizing something or not! That’s an incredibly subjective thing. Also, some authors may just not be good at writing, and you might assume they were romanticizing something when in fact they weren’t trying to do that at all, and guess what, those authors still don’t deserve harassment! They’re allowed to be bad writers or to have a style that not everyone interprets correctly!) I truly do not understand why it’s suddenly considered reasonable to assume every single person thinks abuse is good unless they specifically say it isn’t. That’s a weird thing to assume! And yes, lots and lots and lots and LOTS of people are EXPLICITLY saying you can’t write about dark stuff. Like, so many people. I’m glad you haven’t run into them yet, but I have, and they get nasty when you say “actually I expected you to enforce your own boundaries and offered you plenty of opportunity to do so, why did you get mad at me for creating content you don’t like,” which is why I originally made the post.

No, you’re deliberately twisting my statement in order to make it harder to disagree with you. You are narrowly defining “responsibility” as “explicitly say that abuse is bad all the time because otherwise everyone should assume you believe something is good just because you’ve written it”. This is controversial not because I or other people generally think abuse is good, but because it ignores the responsibility that authors are already taking by tagging and age restricting their work. “Abuse” as a word refers to a bad thing. A fic tagged “abuse cw” implies that the abuse is bad. A fic tagged “no warnings used” means “I chose not to use warnings, so you may or may not find bad stuff in here”. In both of these cases, the explicit “abuse is bad” line is redundant, and thus should not be expected of authors. (and because this has come up before–this does not refer to MISTAGGED work. An author who tags “no warnings needed” when they did need warnings does not fall into the category of people who can be assumed to know abuse is bad. Likewise, someone who uses incorrect terms (like for example, tagging “blood” instead of “graphic violence”) for what happens in their fic–I’m only talking about correct tags. Tagged writing does not require further explanation, because the tags ARE explicit condemnation of certain types of content.) It’s not any author’s job to explain to you that abuse is wrong. If you do not already understand this and expect other people to understand this, then you are either too young to be unsupervised on the internet, or the people who should have taught you about abuse failed you. Those are serious issues that can put you in danger, and I’m not trying to downplay them. However, it’s not my responsibility to educate my readers about abuse being bad. I’m an adult who does not have children, and does not expect readers of my dark works to be children, and explicitly tells children to avoid content I think could harm them. I take responsibility for my work by tagging it and instructing children to avoid it (either explicitly or through “check this box if you’re eighteen or over” messages). You are asking me to further soapbox about how abuse is wrong every time I write something, which is unnecessary and I’m not going to do it. I expect my readers to take responsibility for themselves and either avoid dark content that I’ve tagged, to ask an adult they trust to talk to them about concepts they may have questions about….or even to ask me directly if they’re unsure about something. There are some problems that are real, and that can hurt people, and that are also not my problem to solve. What you’re describing, the idea that some people may never have been taught that abuse is wrong, is one of those problems that is real, and can hurt people, and is also not mine to solve. I am also concerned that your response to the concept “people have discussions about whether content is problematic or not” is “it would be nice to be able to prevent problematic content from existing”. The existence of discussion around a work does not mean the work is problematic. This type of black and white thinking is not healthy.

This is the first addition that’s included the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom’s Freedom to Read Statement, but I really have to break it to you, so many people on tumblr.hell are in fact advocating for the banning of books. And most of them do what the previous commenter did, by assuming that the existence of conversation around a book’s themes (ie. thoughts happening instead of mindless gobbling of whatever propaganda is in style this month), that inherently means that whoever thinks the worst thing about the book is right. This displays a worrying trend, where people in progressive circles have decided that in any conversation, whoever’s angriest is right, and whoever has the most extreme or fearmongering view should be in charge of regulating things for the rest of us. Or, they advocate age restricting period books so only adults can read them. Literally. Because I guess knowing why you’re suddenly gushing blood from your nether regions is dangerous??? Antis, radfems, and exclusionists. The only groups where “progressive” means “Teaming up with fundamentalist christian and alt-right groups to restrict freedoms and increase support for authoritarianism”

i slightly edited these and put my name on them (finally…….) please reblog this post and not the repost that i see from time to time. it has like a bazilion notes!! makes me sad

Is she single asking for a friend

They are also, by dent of being convicted, banned from applying to become a firefighter in the state of CA. Even though they have frontline experience.

These need so much attention since poc are typically the targets of these. I feel like women of color historically have been the biggest victims of these. And still are.

having fangs may not be a ‘‘‘necessary’’’ or ‘‘‘wise’’’ addition to my physiology but it would be very, very sexy and therefore i think i deserve them regardless,

does anyone else feel extremely mediocre and talentless it’s like you’re okay at some stuff but not good enough to ever truly succeed or make it into a career, not naturally gifted at anything nor motivated enough, and will never be recognised or special or exceptional in any way to anyone

The funniest part about unlikeable geek men is they really are fully convinced people don’t like them because of their hobbies. They cannot even begin to process the idea that comics and D&D and shit have in fact always been kinda cool and their personslities might just be repulsive. The combined unwavering ego/persecution complex is... unreal.

“I was socially rejected because I like video games” no tyler, you were socially rejected because you turn every conversation you have into a competition and you call women “females”

would it literally fucking kill yall to like… call people out for their bigotry and insult them that way instead of calling them a psychopath or sociopath or saying they lack empathy and just fucking throwing neurodivergent and mentally ill people under the bus?? like what the fuck yall? the fuck is your problem? calling someone a bigoted asshole somehow isnt enough of an insult to you so youve decided saying they have highly stigmatized mental illness is a worse insult than them being a FUCKING RACIST??? shut the fuck up. mentally ill people are not inherently bad people and should not be used as a fucking insult, certainly not in place of actual fucking bigotry and harm. 

Glad to see we’re all in agreement that cats talk like disparaged victorian children

I am so incredibly glad we finally moved on from “i can has”. Cats are clearly smart enough for advanced sentence structure and dumb enough to draw entirely incorrect conclusions about what they’re talking about.

Can haz snackytreat

i lost my shit at the last panel