September 2024

sapphling:

can you stop fucking using your cursed half demon blood moon eye to check if i’m ovulating

shinraalpha:

officialspec:

officialspec:

officialspec:

walkable cities also means sittable cities send tweet

some people are responding to this like its a joke and im going to assume u are the type of people to say “its only a 3 minute walk” when i tell them the nearest bench is too far away

also anyone who thinks “3 minutes isnt THAT bad” you will be old one day. and you will wish the bench was closer

walkable cities also means cities with free accessible public bathrooms whilst we’re at it

shinraalpha:

officialspec:

officialspec:

officialspec:

walkable cities also means sittable cities send tweet

some people are responding to this like its a joke and im going to assume u are the type of people to say “its only a 3 minute walk” when i tell them the nearest bench is too far away

also anyone who thinks “3 minutes isnt THAT bad” you will be old one day. and you will wish the bench was closer

walkable cities also means cities with free accessible public bathrooms whilst we’re at it

lastoneout:

rthwrms:

jb-blunk:

jb-blunk:

if you are lucky you will love someone and their hair will thin and their breasts will sag and you will kiss them everywhere over and over again

I was having a conversation with someone who was lamenting over how to maintain attraction to our partners as their bodies change and age and feeling self conscious herself about that process and I was like. we should be so lucky as to see them through these many years as we are seen ourselves. Hope that helps u understand

reminds me of this quote i love

Glasses // Jonathan Coulton

pixelmade42:

enchantingruinscandy:

Putting powdered sugar on the post below

ALT

atthecenterofeverything:

wedarkacademia:

I know it is my father’s first time on this Earth, too. And I know He had it worse when he was little.

But I was little too.

— Franz Kafka, from letters to his father

HANK!! HANK THIS IS NOT A KAFKA QUOTE! THE DARK ACADEMIA BLOGGERS TOOK IT FROM A TIKTOK POEM AND DECIDED SINCE IT MENTIONS FATHERS IT WAS WRITTEN BY LATE NINETEENTH CENTURY WRITER FRANZ KAFKA DESPITE THE STYLE VERY CLEARLY BEING FROM 2022 #INKSPILLED INSTAGRAM POETRY HANK! WHY WOULD HE EVEN REFER TO HIS FATHER IN THIRD PERSON IN A LETTER TO HIS FATHER WHEN THEY ARE ALL IN THE SECOND PERSON!! HANK LISTEN TO ME!!! HANK!!!!!

tsamired:

On the COTL fandom wiki’s page for snails this image shows at the very top and I am losing my shit over it. This is the guy you want.

our-queer-experience:

rozieramati:

[image ID: a tweet by ‘I appreciate you’
@/DeeLaSheeArt that says “Not enough adults are understanding that they have to create moments of happiness in their lives. Find things to be excited about. Create plans to look forward to. Decorate the house during holidays. Make a playlist you only listen to on Tuesdays. Keep your favorite snacks stocked in case of a bad day. You have more control over your joy than you think.”

official-linguistics-post:

lolotehe:

laika-the-bitch:

laika-the-bitch:

in an interesting case of linguistic convergent evolution, the english words scale, scale, and scale are all false cognates of each other

scale as in „to climb“ comes from the latin scala, for ladder.

scale as in the measuring device comes from the old norse skal, for a drinking vessel sometimes used as a weighing device

scale as in the dermal plating on the skin of some fish and reptiles comes from the old french escale, for shell or husk.

Three languages enter, one language leaves.

official linguistics post

riftclaw:

ralfmaximus:

whencartoonsruletheworld:

ankle-beez:

Inside Out 2 Was the Hit Pixar Needed, but the Laid-Off Employees Who Crunched on It Are Still Hurting - IGN

jesus fuck, this article

ALT

My “favorite” parts from the article:

1. The same day that Pixar laid off the staff who’d been in crunch mode since September 2023, they announced the crunch-bonuses would only be paid to active employees
2. There was a dedicated Inside Out 2 team tasked with “making Riley not look gay”

“It is, as far as I know, still a thing, where leadership, they’ll bring up Lightyear specifically and say, ‘Oh, Lightyear was a financial failure because it had a queer kiss in it,’” one source tells IGN. “That’s not the reason the movie failed.”

makes bland slop movie using a character from the disney library but none of his expanded universe trappings that might fuel nostalgia, blames the gay kiss they threw in there to scapegoat instead of the fact that it was a bland slop movie

mallalada:

get yourself a main character whos two primary emotions are “little cunt” and “catatonic with grief”

hanakyu:

highonlife22:

alascene:

I literally have this exact thought multiple times every day when i talk to anyone i know. and theyre always watching a new show im like wtf even is that ive never watched a tv show in my life

same-pic-of-neptune-everyday:

catchymemes:

comicaurora:

I’ve been reading some stuff on punitive justice, and it made something click for me that I’ve observed a lot online but haven’t been able to put into words before.

When someone does something wrong, that’s bad, and the damage it does needs to be repaired while the person needs to try to do better in future to minimize repeating harm. We learn it in preschool - say sorry, don’t do it again. If they keep at it, remove them from the situation where they can do the harm until they prove they’re responsible enough to go back in.

So if it turns out someone DIDN’T do anything wrong, that should be a relief! There’s no damage to fix, no internal errors to correct. Less work for everybody, literally no harm done. False alarm, all good.

The thing I’ve observed is, lots of people want them to have done something wrong. There’s almost disappointment when it turns out there’s no harm done. And I think that’s because of this general undercurrent of punitive justice as morally righteous and desirable: someone does something wrong, you get to punish them. Turns out they’re innocent? That’s disappointing. Find another reason you get to punish them, or find another bad person you get to punish. But at the core of it is that desire to punish someone. Someone you can hurt in a way that makes you a better person for hurting them.

This particular brand of almost cannibalistic pseudo-justice is super common in tumblr, one of the most ostensibly liberal spaces on the internet; I see more borderline savagery in online discourse here than in the actually toxic parts of the internet that are just openly cruel for cruelty’s sake. It’s always thrown me for a loop, and has frankly also hurt me, because on the rare occasions I get personally dogpiled, it only actually stings when it makes me worry that I’ve legitimately hurt someone. If I did something wrong, or more realistically when I inevitably do something wrong, that would make it good and right for people to give me shit about it every day until I’m dead.

The thing that clicked for me most recently was this bit in Ijeoma Oluo’s Be A Revolution:

Punitive justice is specifically, uniquely appealing to people who have suffered injustices. Of course it’s the Tumblr zeitgeist. Everyone here is a marginalized person failed by at least one system. Punishing someone for perceived injustice is how someone the system has deemed worthless proves their value in blood, even if the person being punished hasn’t harmed you directly - even if they haven’t harmed anyone. “Righteous” anger isn’t about the target in these cases, it’s about the inflicter. This is how much my pain is worth.

And that kind of violent validation is so alluring and so very dangerous. It seeks an outlet, wearing the justification of justice. Who’s in reach? Who’s an acceptable target this week? What’s a good reason to use?

Is there anything they could do that would make me stop?

comicaurora:

I’ve been reading some stuff on punitive justice, and it made something click for me that I’ve observed a lot online but haven’t been able to put into words before.

When someone does something wrong, that’s bad, and the damage it does needs to be repaired while the person needs to try to do better in future to minimize repeating harm. We learn it in preschool - say sorry, don’t do it again. If they keep at it, remove them from the situation where they can do the harm until they prove they’re responsible enough to go back in.

So if it turns out someone DIDN’T do anything wrong, that should be a relief! There’s no damage to fix, no internal errors to correct. Less work for everybody, literally no harm done. False alarm, all good.

The thing I’ve observed is, lots of people want them to have done something wrong. There’s almost disappointment when it turns out there’s no harm done. And I think that’s because of this general undercurrent of punitive justice as morally righteous and desirable: someone does something wrong, you get to punish them. Turns out they’re innocent? That’s disappointing. Find another reason you get to punish them, or find another bad person you get to punish. But at the core of it is that desire to punish someone. Someone you can hurt in a way that makes you a better person for hurting them.

This particular brand of almost cannibalistic pseudo-justice is super common in tumblr, one of the most ostensibly liberal spaces on the internet; I see more borderline savagery in online discourse here than in the actually toxic parts of the internet that are just openly cruel for cruelty’s sake. It’s always thrown me for a loop, and has frankly also hurt me, because on the rare occasions I get personally dogpiled, it only actually stings when it makes me worry that I’ve legitimately hurt someone. If I did something wrong, or more realistically when I inevitably do something wrong, that would make it good and right for people to give me shit about it every day until I’m dead.

The thing that clicked for me most recently was this bit in Ijeoma Oluo’s Be A Revolution:

Punitive justice is specifically, uniquely appealing to people who have suffered injustices. Of course it’s the Tumblr zeitgeist. Everyone here is a marginalized person failed by at least one system. Punishing someone for perceived injustice is how someone the system has deemed worthless proves their value in blood, even if the person being punished hasn’t harmed you directly - even if they haven’t harmed anyone. “Righteous” anger isn’t about the target in these cases, it’s about the inflicter. This is how much my pain is worth.

And that kind of violent validation is so alluring and so very dangerous. It seeks an outlet, wearing the justification of justice. Who’s in reach? Who’s an acceptable target this week? What’s a good reason to use?

Is there anything they could do that would make me stop?

comicaurora:

I’ve been reading some stuff on punitive justice, and it made something click for me that I’ve observed a lot online but haven’t been able to put into words before.

When someone does something wrong, that’s bad, and the damage it does needs to be repaired while the person needs to try to do better in future to minimize repeating harm. We learn it in preschool - say sorry, don’t do it again. If they keep at it, remove them from the situation where they can do the harm until they prove they’re responsible enough to go back in.

So if it turns out someone DIDN’T do anything wrong, that should be a relief! There’s no damage to fix, no internal errors to correct. Less work for everybody, literally no harm done. False alarm, all good.

The thing I’ve observed is, lots of people want them to have done something wrong. There’s almost disappointment when it turns out there’s no harm done. And I think that’s because of this general undercurrent of punitive justice as morally righteous and desirable: someone does something wrong, you get to punish them. Turns out they’re innocent? That’s disappointing. Find another reason you get to punish them, or find another bad person you get to punish. But at the core of it is that desire to punish someone. Someone you can hurt in a way that makes you a better person for hurting them.

This particular brand of almost cannibalistic pseudo-justice is super common in tumblr, one of the most ostensibly liberal spaces on the internet; I see more borderline savagery in online discourse here than in the actually toxic parts of the internet that are just openly cruel for cruelty’s sake. It’s always thrown me for a loop, and has frankly also hurt me, because on the rare occasions I get personally dogpiled, it only actually stings when it makes me worry that I’ve legitimately hurt someone. If I did something wrong, or more realistically when I inevitably do something wrong, that would make it good and right for people to give me shit about it every day until I’m dead.

The thing that clicked for me most recently was this bit in Ijeoma Oluo’s Be A Revolution:

Punitive justice is specifically, uniquely appealing to people who have suffered injustices. Of course it’s the Tumblr zeitgeist. Everyone here is a marginalized person failed by at least one system. Punishing someone for perceived injustice is how someone the system has deemed worthless proves their value in blood, even if the person being punished hasn’t harmed you directly - even if they haven’t harmed anyone. “Righteous” anger isn’t about the target in these cases, it’s about the inflicter. This is how much my pain is worth.

And that kind of violent validation is so alluring and so very dangerous. It seeks an outlet, wearing the justification of justice. Who’s in reach? Who’s an acceptable target this week? What’s a good reason to use?

Is there anything they could do that would make me stop?

comicaurora:

I’ve been reading some stuff on punitive justice, and it made something click for me that I’ve observed a lot online but haven’t been able to put into words before.

When someone does something wrong, that’s bad, and the damage it does needs to be repaired while the person needs to try to do better in future to minimize repeating harm. We learn it in preschool - say sorry, don’t do it again. If they keep at it, remove them from the situation where they can do the harm until they prove they’re responsible enough to go back in.

So if it turns out someone DIDN’T do anything wrong, that should be a relief! There’s no damage to fix, no internal errors to correct. Less work for everybody, literally no harm done. False alarm, all good.

The thing I’ve observed is, lots of people want them to have done something wrong. There’s almost disappointment when it turns out there’s no harm done. And I think that’s because of this general undercurrent of punitive justice as morally righteous and desirable: someone does something wrong, you get to punish them. Turns out they’re innocent? That’s disappointing. Find another reason you get to punish them, or find another bad person you get to punish. But at the core of it is that desire to punish someone. Someone you can hurt in a way that makes you a better person for hurting them.

This particular brand of almost cannibalistic pseudo-justice is super common in tumblr, one of the most ostensibly liberal spaces on the internet; I see more borderline savagery in online discourse here than in the actually toxic parts of the internet that are just openly cruel for cruelty’s sake. It’s always thrown me for a loop, and has frankly also hurt me, because on the rare occasions I get personally dogpiled, it only actually stings when it makes me worry that I’ve legitimately hurt someone. If I did something wrong, or more realistically when I inevitably do something wrong, that would make it good and right for people to give me shit about it every day until I’m dead.

The thing that clicked for me most recently was this bit in Ijeoma Oluo’s Be A Revolution:

Punitive justice is specifically, uniquely appealing to people who have suffered injustices. Of course it’s the Tumblr zeitgeist. Everyone here is a marginalized person failed by at least one system. Punishing someone for perceived injustice is how someone the system has deemed worthless proves their value in blood, even if the person being punished hasn’t harmed you directly - even if they haven’t harmed anyone. “Righteous” anger isn’t about the target in these cases, it’s about the inflicter. This is how much my pain is worth.

And that kind of violent validation is so alluring and so very dangerous. It seeks an outlet, wearing the justification of justice. Who’s in reach? Who’s an acceptable target this week? What’s a good reason to use?

Is there anything they could do that would make me stop?

comicaurora:

I’ve been reading some stuff on punitive justice, and it made something click for me that I’ve observed a lot online but haven’t been able to put into words before.

When someone does something wrong, that’s bad, and the damage it does needs to be repaired while the person needs to try to do better in future to minimize repeating harm. We learn it in preschool - say sorry, don’t do it again. If they keep at it, remove them from the situation where they can do the harm until they prove they’re responsible enough to go back in.

So if it turns out someone DIDN’T do anything wrong, that should be a relief! There’s no damage to fix, no internal errors to correct. Less work for everybody, literally no harm done. False alarm, all good.

The thing I’ve observed is, lots of people want them to have done something wrong. There’s almost disappointment when it turns out there’s no harm done. And I think that’s because of this general undercurrent of punitive justice as morally righteous and desirable: someone does something wrong, you get to punish them. Turns out they’re innocent? That’s disappointing. Find another reason you get to punish them, or find another bad person you get to punish. But at the core of it is that desire to punish someone. Someone you can hurt in a way that makes you a better person for hurting them.

This particular brand of almost cannibalistic pseudo-justice is super common in tumblr, one of the most ostensibly liberal spaces on the internet; I see more borderline savagery in online discourse here than in the actually toxic parts of the internet that are just openly cruel for cruelty’s sake. It’s always thrown me for a loop, and has frankly also hurt me, because on the rare occasions I get personally dogpiled, it only actually stings when it makes me worry that I’ve legitimately hurt someone. If I did something wrong, or more realistically when I inevitably do something wrong, that would make it good and right for people to give me shit about it every day until I’m dead.

The thing that clicked for me most recently was this bit in Ijeoma Oluo’s Be A Revolution:

Punitive justice is specifically, uniquely appealing to people who have suffered injustices. Of course it’s the Tumblr zeitgeist. Everyone here is a marginalized person failed by at least one system. Punishing someone for perceived injustice is how someone the system has deemed worthless proves their value in blood, even if the person being punished hasn’t harmed you directly - even if they haven’t harmed anyone. “Righteous” anger isn’t about the target in these cases, it’s about the inflicter. This is how much my pain is worth.

And that kind of violent validation is so alluring and so very dangerous. It seeks an outlet, wearing the justification of justice. Who’s in reach? Who’s an acceptable target this week? What’s a good reason to use?

Is there anything they could do that would make me stop?

comicaurora:

I’ve been reading some stuff on punitive justice, and it made something click for me that I’ve observed a lot online but haven’t been able to put into words before.

When someone does something wrong, that’s bad, and the damage it does needs to be repaired while the person needs to try to do better in future to minimize repeating harm. We learn it in preschool - say sorry, don’t do it again. If they keep at it, remove them from the situation where they can do the harm until they prove they’re responsible enough to go back in.

So if it turns out someone DIDN’T do anything wrong, that should be a relief! There’s no damage to fix, no internal errors to correct. Less work for everybody, literally no harm done. False alarm, all good.

The thing I’ve observed is, lots of people want them to have done something wrong. There’s almost disappointment when it turns out there’s no harm done. And I think that’s because of this general undercurrent of punitive justice as morally righteous and desirable: someone does something wrong, you get to punish them. Turns out they’re innocent? That’s disappointing. Find another reason you get to punish them, or find another bad person you get to punish. But at the core of it is that desire to punish someone. Someone you can hurt in a way that makes you a better person for hurting them.

This particular brand of almost cannibalistic pseudo-justice is super common in tumblr, one of the most ostensibly liberal spaces on the internet; I see more borderline savagery in online discourse here than in the actually toxic parts of the internet that are just openly cruel for cruelty’s sake. It’s always thrown me for a loop, and has frankly also hurt me, because on the rare occasions I get personally dogpiled, it only actually stings when it makes me worry that I’ve legitimately hurt someone. If I did something wrong, or more realistically when I inevitably do something wrong, that would make it good and right for people to give me shit about it every day until I’m dead.

The thing that clicked for me most recently was this bit in Ijeoma Oluo’s Be A Revolution:

Punitive justice is specifically, uniquely appealing to people who have suffered injustices. Of course it’s the Tumblr zeitgeist. Everyone here is a marginalized person failed by at least one system. Punishing someone for perceived injustice is how someone the system has deemed worthless proves their value in blood, even if the person being punished hasn’t harmed you directly - even if they haven’t harmed anyone. “Righteous” anger isn’t about the target in these cases, it’s about the inflicter. This is how much my pain is worth.

And that kind of violent validation is so alluring and so very dangerous. It seeks an outlet, wearing the justification of justice. Who’s in reach? Who’s an acceptable target this week? What’s a good reason to use?

Is there anything they could do that would make me stop?

comicaurora:

I’ve been reading some stuff on punitive justice, and it made something click for me that I’ve observed a lot online but haven’t been able to put into words before.

When someone does something wrong, that’s bad, and the damage it does needs to be repaired while the person needs to try to do better in future to minimize repeating harm. We learn it in preschool - say sorry, don’t do it again. If they keep at it, remove them from the situation where they can do the harm until they prove they’re responsible enough to go back in.

So if it turns out someone DIDN’T do anything wrong, that should be a relief! There’s no damage to fix, no internal errors to correct. Less work for everybody, literally no harm done. False alarm, all good.

The thing I’ve observed is, lots of people want them to have done something wrong. There’s almost disappointment when it turns out there’s no harm done. And I think that’s because of this general undercurrent of punitive justice as morally righteous and desirable: someone does something wrong, you get to punish them. Turns out they’re innocent? That’s disappointing. Find another reason you get to punish them, or find another bad person you get to punish. But at the core of it is that desire to punish someone. Someone you can hurt in a way that makes you a better person for hurting them.

This particular brand of almost cannibalistic pseudo-justice is super common in tumblr, one of the most ostensibly liberal spaces on the internet; I see more borderline savagery in online discourse here than in the actually toxic parts of the internet that are just openly cruel for cruelty’s sake. It’s always thrown me for a loop, and has frankly also hurt me, because on the rare occasions I get personally dogpiled, it only actually stings when it makes me worry that I’ve legitimately hurt someone. If I did something wrong, or more realistically when I inevitably do something wrong, that would make it good and right for people to give me shit about it every day until I’m dead.

The thing that clicked for me most recently was this bit in Ijeoma Oluo’s Be A Revolution:

Punitive justice is specifically, uniquely appealing to people who have suffered injustices. Of course it’s the Tumblr zeitgeist. Everyone here is a marginalized person failed by at least one system. Punishing someone for perceived injustice is how someone the system has deemed worthless proves their value in blood, even if the person being punished hasn’t harmed you directly - even if they haven’t harmed anyone. “Righteous” anger isn’t about the target in these cases, it’s about the inflicter. This is how much my pain is worth.

And that kind of violent validation is so alluring and so very dangerous. It seeks an outlet, wearing the justification of justice. Who’s in reach? Who’s an acceptable target this week? What’s a good reason to use?

Is there anything they could do that would make me stop?

comicaurora:

I’ve been reading some stuff on punitive justice, and it made something click for me that I’ve observed a lot online but haven’t been able to put into words before.

When someone does something wrong, that’s bad, and the damage it does needs to be repaired while the person needs to try to do better in future to minimize repeating harm. We learn it in preschool - say sorry, don’t do it again. If they keep at it, remove them from the situation where they can do the harm until they prove they’re responsible enough to go back in.

So if it turns out someone DIDN’T do anything wrong, that should be a relief! There’s no damage to fix, no internal errors to correct. Less work for everybody, literally no harm done. False alarm, all good.

The thing I’ve observed is, lots of people want them to have done something wrong. There’s almost disappointment when it turns out there’s no harm done. And I think that’s because of this general undercurrent of punitive justice as morally righteous and desirable: someone does something wrong, you get to punish them. Turns out they’re innocent? That’s disappointing. Find another reason you get to punish them, or find another bad person you get to punish. But at the core of it is that desire to punish someone. Someone you can hurt in a way that makes you a better person for hurting them.

This particular brand of almost cannibalistic pseudo-justice is super common in tumblr, one of the most ostensibly liberal spaces on the internet; I see more borderline savagery in online discourse here than in the actually toxic parts of the internet that are just openly cruel for cruelty’s sake. It’s always thrown me for a loop, and has frankly also hurt me, because on the rare occasions I get personally dogpiled, it only actually stings when it makes me worry that I’ve legitimately hurt someone. If I did something wrong, or more realistically when I inevitably do something wrong, that would make it good and right for people to give me shit about it every day until I’m dead.

The thing that clicked for me most recently was this bit in Ijeoma Oluo’s Be A Revolution:

Punitive justice is specifically, uniquely appealing to people who have suffered injustices. Of course it’s the Tumblr zeitgeist. Everyone here is a marginalized person failed by at least one system. Punishing someone for perceived injustice is how someone the system has deemed worthless proves their value in blood, even if the person being punished hasn’t harmed you directly - even if they haven’t harmed anyone. “Righteous” anger isn’t about the target in these cases, it’s about the inflicter. This is how much my pain is worth.

And that kind of violent validation is so alluring and so very dangerous. It seeks an outlet, wearing the justification of justice. Who’s in reach? Who’s an acceptable target this week? What’s a good reason to use?

Is there anything they could do that would make me stop?

comicaurora:

I’ve been reading some stuff on punitive justice, and it made something click for me that I’ve observed a lot online but haven’t been able to put into words before.

When someone does something wrong, that’s bad, and the damage it does needs to be repaired while the person needs to try to do better in future to minimize repeating harm. We learn it in preschool - say sorry, don’t do it again. If they keep at it, remove them from the situation where they can do the harm until they prove they’re responsible enough to go back in.

So if it turns out someone DIDN’T do anything wrong, that should be a relief! There’s no damage to fix, no internal errors to correct. Less work for everybody, literally no harm done. False alarm, all good.

The thing I’ve observed is, lots of people want them to have done something wrong. There’s almost disappointment when it turns out there’s no harm done. And I think that’s because of this general undercurrent of punitive justice as morally righteous and desirable: someone does something wrong, you get to punish them. Turns out they’re innocent? That’s disappointing. Find another reason you get to punish them, or find another bad person you get to punish. But at the core of it is that desire to punish someone. Someone you can hurt in a way that makes you a better person for hurting them.

This particular brand of almost cannibalistic pseudo-justice is super common in tumblr, one of the most ostensibly liberal spaces on the internet; I see more borderline savagery in online discourse here than in the actually toxic parts of the internet that are just openly cruel for cruelty’s sake. It’s always thrown me for a loop, and has frankly also hurt me, because on the rare occasions I get personally dogpiled, it only actually stings when it makes me worry that I’ve legitimately hurt someone. If I did something wrong, or more realistically when I inevitably do something wrong, that would make it good and right for people to give me shit about it every day until I’m dead.

The thing that clicked for me most recently was this bit in Ijeoma Oluo’s Be A Revolution:

Punitive justice is specifically, uniquely appealing to people who have suffered injustices. Of course it’s the Tumblr zeitgeist. Everyone here is a marginalized person failed by at least one system. Punishing someone for perceived injustice is how someone the system has deemed worthless proves their value in blood, even if the person being punished hasn’t harmed you directly - even if they haven’t harmed anyone. “Righteous” anger isn’t about the target in these cases, it’s about the inflicter. This is how much my pain is worth.

And that kind of violent validation is so alluring and so very dangerous. It seeks an outlet, wearing the justification of justice. Who’s in reach? Who’s an acceptable target this week? What’s a good reason to use?

Is there anything they could do that would make me stop?

comicaurora:

I’ve been reading some stuff on punitive justice, and it made something click for me that I’ve observed a lot online but haven’t been able to put into words before.

When someone does something wrong, that’s bad, and the damage it does needs to be repaired while the person needs to try to do better in future to minimize repeating harm. We learn it in preschool - say sorry, don’t do it again. If they keep at it, remove them from the situation where they can do the harm until they prove they’re responsible enough to go back in.

So if it turns out someone DIDN’T do anything wrong, that should be a relief! There’s no damage to fix, no internal errors to correct. Less work for everybody, literally no harm done. False alarm, all good.

The thing I’ve observed is, lots of people want them to have done something wrong. There’s almost disappointment when it turns out there’s no harm done. And I think that’s because of this general undercurrent of punitive justice as morally righteous and desirable: someone does something wrong, you get to punish them. Turns out they’re innocent? That’s disappointing. Find another reason you get to punish them, or find another bad person you get to punish. But at the core of it is that desire to punish someone. Someone you can hurt in a way that makes you a better person for hurting them.

This particular brand of almost cannibalistic pseudo-justice is super common in tumblr, one of the most ostensibly liberal spaces on the internet; I see more borderline savagery in online discourse here than in the actually toxic parts of the internet that are just openly cruel for cruelty’s sake. It’s always thrown me for a loop, and has frankly also hurt me, because on the rare occasions I get personally dogpiled, it only actually stings when it makes me worry that I’ve legitimately hurt someone. If I did something wrong, or more realistically when I inevitably do something wrong, that would make it good and right for people to give me shit about it every day until I’m dead.

The thing that clicked for me most recently was this bit in Ijeoma Oluo’s Be A Revolution:

Punitive justice is specifically, uniquely appealing to people who have suffered injustices. Of course it’s the Tumblr zeitgeist. Everyone here is a marginalized person failed by at least one system. Punishing someone for perceived injustice is how someone the system has deemed worthless proves their value in blood, even if the person being punished hasn’t harmed you directly - even if they haven’t harmed anyone. “Righteous” anger isn’t about the target in these cases, it’s about the inflicter. This is how much my pain is worth.

And that kind of violent validation is so alluring and so very dangerous. It seeks an outlet, wearing the justification of justice. Who’s in reach? Who’s an acceptable target this week? What’s a good reason to use?

Is there anything they could do that would make me stop?

comicaurora:

I’ve been reading some stuff on punitive justice, and it made something click for me that I’ve observed a lot online but haven’t been able to put into words before.

When someone does something wrong, that’s bad, and the damage it does needs to be repaired while the person needs to try to do better in future to minimize repeating harm. We learn it in preschool - say sorry, don’t do it again. If they keep at it, remove them from the situation where they can do the harm until they prove they’re responsible enough to go back in.

So if it turns out someone DIDN’T do anything wrong, that should be a relief! There’s no damage to fix, no internal errors to correct. Less work for everybody, literally no harm done. False alarm, all good.

The thing I’ve observed is, lots of people want them to have done something wrong. There’s almost disappointment when it turns out there’s no harm done. And I think that’s because of this general undercurrent of punitive justice as morally righteous and desirable: someone does something wrong, you get to punish them. Turns out they’re innocent? That’s disappointing. Find another reason you get to punish them, or find another bad person you get to punish. But at the core of it is that desire to punish someone. Someone you can hurt in a way that makes you a better person for hurting them.

This particular brand of almost cannibalistic pseudo-justice is super common in tumblr, one of the most ostensibly liberal spaces on the internet; I see more borderline savagery in online discourse here than in the actually toxic parts of the internet that are just openly cruel for cruelty’s sake. It’s always thrown me for a loop, and has frankly also hurt me, because on the rare occasions I get personally dogpiled, it only actually stings when it makes me worry that I’ve legitimately hurt someone. If I did something wrong, or more realistically when I inevitably do something wrong, that would make it good and right for people to give me shit about it every day until I’m dead.

The thing that clicked for me most recently was this bit in Ijeoma Oluo’s Be A Revolution:

Punitive justice is specifically, uniquely appealing to people who have suffered injustices. Of course it’s the Tumblr zeitgeist. Everyone here is a marginalized person failed by at least one system. Punishing someone for perceived injustice is how someone the system has deemed worthless proves their value in blood, even if the person being punished hasn’t harmed you directly - even if they haven’t harmed anyone. “Righteous” anger isn’t about the target in these cases, it’s about the inflicter. This is how much my pain is worth.

And that kind of violent validation is so alluring and so very dangerous. It seeks an outlet, wearing the justification of justice. Who’s in reach? Who’s an acceptable target this week? What’s a good reason to use?

Is there anything they could do that would make me stop?

comicaurora:

I’ve been reading some stuff on punitive justice, and it made something click for me that I’ve observed a lot online but haven’t been able to put into words before.

When someone does something wrong, that’s bad, and the damage it does needs to be repaired while the person needs to try to do better in future to minimize repeating harm. We learn it in preschool - say sorry, don’t do it again. If they keep at it, remove them from the situation where they can do the harm until they prove they’re responsible enough to go back in.

So if it turns out someone DIDN’T do anything wrong, that should be a relief! There’s no damage to fix, no internal errors to correct. Less work for everybody, literally no harm done. False alarm, all good.

The thing I’ve observed is, lots of people want them to have done something wrong. There’s almost disappointment when it turns out there’s no harm done. And I think that’s because of this general undercurrent of punitive justice as morally righteous and desirable: someone does something wrong, you get to punish them. Turns out they’re innocent? That’s disappointing. Find another reason you get to punish them, or find another bad person you get to punish. But at the core of it is that desire to punish someone. Someone you can hurt in a way that makes you a better person for hurting them.

This particular brand of almost cannibalistic pseudo-justice is super common in tumblr, one of the most ostensibly liberal spaces on the internet; I see more borderline savagery in online discourse here than in the actually toxic parts of the internet that are just openly cruel for cruelty’s sake. It’s always thrown me for a loop, and has frankly also hurt me, because on the rare occasions I get personally dogpiled, it only actually stings when it makes me worry that I’ve legitimately hurt someone. If I did something wrong, or more realistically when I inevitably do something wrong, that would make it good and right for people to give me shit about it every day until I’m dead.

The thing that clicked for me most recently was this bit in Ijeoma Oluo’s Be A Revolution:

Punitive justice is specifically, uniquely appealing to people who have suffered injustices. Of course it’s the Tumblr zeitgeist. Everyone here is a marginalized person failed by at least one system. Punishing someone for perceived injustice is how someone the system has deemed worthless proves their value in blood, even if the person being punished hasn’t harmed you directly - even if they haven’t harmed anyone. “Righteous” anger isn’t about the target in these cases, it’s about the inflicter. This is how much my pain is worth.

And that kind of violent validation is so alluring and so very dangerous. It seeks an outlet, wearing the justification of justice. Who’s in reach? Who’s an acceptable target this week? What’s a good reason to use?

Is there anything they could do that would make me stop?

comicaurora:

I’ve been reading some stuff on punitive justice, and it made something click for me that I’ve observed a lot online but haven’t been able to put into words before.

When someone does something wrong, that’s bad, and the damage it does needs to be repaired while the person needs to try to do better in future to minimize repeating harm. We learn it in preschool - say sorry, don’t do it again. If they keep at it, remove them from the situation where they can do the harm until they prove they’re responsible enough to go back in.

So if it turns out someone DIDN’T do anything wrong, that should be a relief! There’s no damage to fix, no internal errors to correct. Less work for everybody, literally no harm done. False alarm, all good.

The thing I’ve observed is, lots of people want them to have done something wrong. There’s almost disappointment when it turns out there’s no harm done. And I think that’s because of this general undercurrent of punitive justice as morally righteous and desirable: someone does something wrong, you get to punish them. Turns out they’re innocent? That’s disappointing. Find another reason you get to punish them, or find another bad person you get to punish. But at the core of it is that desire to punish someone. Someone you can hurt in a way that makes you a better person for hurting them.

This particular brand of almost cannibalistic pseudo-justice is super common in tumblr, one of the most ostensibly liberal spaces on the internet; I see more borderline savagery in online discourse here than in the actually toxic parts of the internet that are just openly cruel for cruelty’s sake. It’s always thrown me for a loop, and has frankly also hurt me, because on the rare occasions I get personally dogpiled, it only actually stings when it makes me worry that I’ve legitimately hurt someone. If I did something wrong, or more realistically when I inevitably do something wrong, that would make it good and right for people to give me shit about it every day until I’m dead.

The thing that clicked for me most recently was this bit in Ijeoma Oluo’s Be A Revolution:

Punitive justice is specifically, uniquely appealing to people who have suffered injustices. Of course it’s the Tumblr zeitgeist. Everyone here is a marginalized person failed by at least one system. Punishing someone for perceived injustice is how someone the system has deemed worthless proves their value in blood, even if the person being punished hasn’t harmed you directly - even if they haven’t harmed anyone. “Righteous” anger isn’t about the target in these cases, it’s about the inflicter. This is how much my pain is worth.

And that kind of violent validation is so alluring and so very dangerous. It seeks an outlet, wearing the justification of justice. Who’s in reach? Who’s an acceptable target this week? What’s a good reason to use?

Is there anything they could do that would make me stop?

atlas-the-worldbuilder:

eldritchjackalope:

eldritchjackalope:

bees-with-swords:

“Do you ever dream of land?” The whale asks the tuna.

“No.” Says the tuna, “Do you?”

“I have never seen it.” Says the whale, “but deep in my body, I remember it.”

“Why do you care,” says the tuna, “if you will never see it.”

“There are bones in my body built to walk through the forests and the mountains.” Says the whale.

“They will disappear.” Says the tuna, “one day, your body will forget the forests and the mountains.”

“Maybe I don’t want to forget,” Says the whale, “The forests were once my home.”

“I have seen the forests.” Whispers the salmon, almost to itself.

“Tell me what you have seen,” says the whale.

“The forests spawned me.” Says the salmon. “They sent me to the ocean to grow. When I am fat with the bounty of the ocean, I will bring it home.”

“Why would the forests seek the bounty of the oceans?” Asks the whale. “They have bounty of their own.”

“You forget,” says the salmon, “That the oceans were once their home.”

@bees-with-swords decided to do another pass at illustrating this two years later, your writing is so lovely

This is frikkin poetry, I love this so much.

thememedaddy:

atlas-the-worldbuilder:

eldritchjackalope:

eldritchjackalope:

bees-with-swords:

“Do you ever dream of land?” The whale asks the tuna.

“No.” Says the tuna, “Do you?”

“I have never seen it.” Says the whale, “but deep in my body, I remember it.”

“Why do you care,” says the tuna, “if you will never see it.”

“There are bones in my body built to walk through the forests and the mountains.” Says the whale.

“They will disappear.” Says the tuna, “one day, your body will forget the forests and the mountains.”

“Maybe I don’t want to forget,” Says the whale, “The forests were once my home.”

“I have seen the forests.” Whispers the salmon, almost to itself.

“Tell me what you have seen,” says the whale.

“The forests spawned me.” Says the salmon. “They sent me to the ocean to grow. When I am fat with the bounty of the ocean, I will bring it home.”

“Why would the forests seek the bounty of the oceans?” Asks the whale. “They have bounty of their own.”

“You forget,” says the salmon, “That the oceans were once their home.”

@bees-with-swords decided to do another pass at illustrating this two years later, your writing is so lovely

This is frikkin poetry, I love this so much.

hrsgrl16:

only-cat-memes:

@k1nky-r0b0t-g1rl

lilyblisslys:

lilyblisslys:

if Kermit the frog slid in your DMs but you knew he was in a committed monogamous relationship with miss piggy would you still let him hit?

Kermit infidelity

yes

no

Only kissing

See Results

follow up: miss piggy slides in your DMs, but you know she’s in a committed monogamous relationship with Kermit.

Do you let her hit?

Yes

No

Only kissing

See Results

permetutotheworld:

plutoarttv:

prometheus: hot take,

the greek gods: no give that back

I shouldn’t have laughed that loudly

finleyforevermore:

apofiss:

Big frog smol frog! 🐸… wallpaper link HERE! ^o^

@little-lee-froggie @ofthefrogs @frogmanfae

liberalsarecool:

Men/boys are conditioned to ignore their feelings and emotions. Men/boys with actual emotional intelligence are ridiculed by insecure peers as feminine.

This is how gun culture controls insecure men.

Insecure men use guns before dealing with their emotions.

frigidmusings:

noknowshame:

noknowshame:

why is religious Christmas imagery all so joyful and pleasant? where is the inherent horror of the birth of Christ? A mother is handed her newborn child, wailing and innocent. Her hands come away sticky. Red. Simply by giving her son life she has already killed him. He is doomed from the beginning. Her love will not save him from suffering. Because the thing cradled in her arms is not a baby, it is a sacrifice: born amongst the other bleating animals whose blood will one day be spilled in the name of what demands it. the night is silent with anticipation. Mary, did you know? That your womb was also a grave?

Tags via @noknowshame

You don’t get to leave this in the tags

stankpasta:

captainhaterade:

switchingtogeico:

urfavhatesterfs:

YOU hates terfs

rb if u hates terfs

frigidmusings:

noknowshame:

noknowshame:

why is religious Christmas imagery all so joyful and pleasant? where is the inherent horror of the birth of Christ? A mother is handed her newborn child, wailing and innocent. Her hands come away sticky. Red. Simply by giving her son life she has already killed him. He is doomed from the beginning. Her love will not save him from suffering. Because the thing cradled in her arms is not a baby, it is a sacrifice: born amongst the other bleating animals whose blood will one day be spilled in the name of what demands it. the night is silent with anticipation. Mary, did you know? That your womb was also a grave?

Tags via @noknowshame

You don’t get to leave this in the tags

frigidmusings:

noknowshame:

noknowshame:

why is religious Christmas imagery all so joyful and pleasant? where is the inherent horror of the birth of Christ? A mother is handed her newborn child, wailing and innocent. Her hands come away sticky. Red. Simply by giving her son life she has already killed him. He is doomed from the beginning. Her love will not save him from suffering. Because the thing cradled in her arms is not a baby, it is a sacrifice: born amongst the other bleating animals whose blood will one day be spilled in the name of what demands it. the night is silent with anticipation. Mary, did you know? That your womb was also a grave?

Tags via @noknowshame

You don’t get to leave this in the tags

yeehawpim:

yeehawpim:

a comic about different types of storytellers

ALT

ALT

✏️Made a sticker for this comic!✏️

$3usd

baddywronglegs:

broccoli-bitching:

broccoli-bitching:

broccoli-bitching:

Have you ever been bitten by a white person?

Yes

No

See Results

No I will not explain why I’m asking

I love how this post has become white people just admitting they bite people

Folks, if you wake up with a strong physical aversion to sunlight and an unexplained craving for cheese…

kaban-bang:

kaban-bang:

memingursa:

kaban-bang:

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Rick and Morty. The humor is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of theoretical physics most of the jokes will go over a typical viewer’s head.

disgustinggf:

zer0-g:

doubleca5t:

If Kendrick calls Drake a pedophile at the Super Bowl I think Drake might just have to go into witness protection because like how are you supposed to keep making music at that point

canadianno:

ditzyclown:

canadianno:

ditzyclown:

ditzyclown:

canadianno:

ditzyclown:

canadianno:

ditzyclown:

canadianno:

ditzyclown:

canadianno:

ditzyclown:

ditzyclown:

I found narinder’s child guys (I named him nibbles)

I don’t think i will ever make a shitten design mainly because I have this little guy, he’s cannon, he’s my son, I love him, and I will never give him up nor let him down

You can’t hide that shitten concept design on the right from us, Mo

That was the 1th attempt, Nibbles was superior

WRONG

It doesn’t even have a body designed!!!!!!!!1 Doesn’t count!!!!!!

(back to purgatory with thee!!!!!!!)

Pls excuse the messiness I am at work </3

it’s third eye is looking into the fourth dimension, what are you smiling at evil creture, born from pentagram and ichor, you will never know what true family is.

They’re beyond your comprehension, fool

you’re tempting me to draw the far superior nibbles

YEAHHHHHH LITTLE BABY SHAME!!!!!!!!!! Love them sm. Congrats on the new baby Lamb and Narinder

what do you see in that creature

I just,,, love them. They’re fluffy and very visually appealing. Listen if the Lamb and Nari won’t keep them, give em to one of the bishops or somn. If you’ve got Leshycat give them an adoptive shitten kid. I think it’d be funny

zer0-g:

doubleca5t:

If Kendrick calls Drake a pedophile at the Super Bowl I think Drake might just have to go into witness protection because like how are you supposed to keep making music at that point

kosmogrl:

serial-unaliver-deactivated2024:

This comment makes me feel less insane because I swear there has been a drastic increase in misogyny. I see (and hear) it all the time in ways I didn’t before