I can’t return to the site for now.
I’m sorry for anything I did wrong and I take responsibility for my mistakes.
This will be a long break.
I can’t return to the site for now.
I’m sorry for anything I did wrong and I take responsibility for my mistakes.
This will be a long break.
This really is just too much.
I literally can’t cope with it.
Tolerance of introlerence only promotes/allows that intolerence. It’s hard to stand up for what is right, but at the end of the day, it has to be done. Someone has to stand up for people who are too afraid to voice their opinions, someone has to stand up for those who can’t voice their opinions. Too many people are afraid of standing up for others, because the masses tend to be ignorant, and ignorant people tend to be mean, rude, and often violent (verbally, and physically).
I don’t think I will ever apologize for standing up for what is right. If it makes someone uncomfortable, good. Maybe they shouldn’t voice their views if their views are so bloody ignorant.
Autistic people have feelings. We are not punching bags. We do not like being treated as less important. We are incompetent.
We may not respond with flowers and rainbows when you are an ableist douchebag.
We may have trouble caring that much when no one cares about ableist douchebagginess but when your oppressor gets stressed out, the world falls to their knees.
you have been comfortable this whooooole time, allistic people.
We have not. At all. And we’ve been screaming at you to pay attention. You do not. We get mean.
So right now? Just think for a while, okay?
moononwaters replied to your post: …They sound scary. *hides behind*
Can you provide a list so I can instant block?
These are people that I’ve blocked. I’m sure there are more. But these are the ones I have come across till now. Most of these blogs are white libertarians.
TRIGGER WARNING FOR ALL.
Circulating (also, there’s this list).
A handy list.
Here’s the situation. Autistic person says this happened to me and is ableism!
you say, this is not ableism!
but you are not autistic!
What to do!
realize that the autistic person is the expert in their own oppression, not you, period, and stop being an ableist douchebag by invalidating their feelings and experiences and telling them they are wrong.do not make the autistic person explain multiple times the basic definition of ableist and 101 ableist concepts before you agree, drop it, and apologize, patting yourself on the back for what an ally you are.
simply realize you are not the expert even if you have an autistic cousin or work with autistic people.
your opinion about this is irrelevant.
stop. Do not pass go or collect any cookies.
Also if you are going to tell me this is wrong bc I am autistic and am not entirely competent stop trying. You are fullstop ableist. Stop talking about it. Because you are wrong.
I need (at the absolute minimum) another $1000 in order to go back to school in the fall. That’s just the tuition, by the way, that’s not including food, textbooks, or art supplies. I don’t even want to think about the cost of the surgeries I’m going to need yet, but on the off chance that I get more than enough to go to school next year, whatever else I get will go towards funding my transition.
I can’t get a job for various reasons (very few people will hire me because I’m trans*, I have difficulty even applying because of my anxiety) and the commissions I’m selling online are not even gonna get close to covering what I need. I’m living with my parents and they’re paying for food, but they won’t pay for gas money and I have very limited access to the car.
Please signal boost this?
Signal boost for Hunter :(
For anarchists who do know something about anthropology, the arguments are all too familiar. A typical exchange goes something like this:
Skeptic: Well, I might take this whole anarchism idea more seriously if you could give me some reason to think it would work. Can you name me a single viable example of a society which has existed without a government?
Anarchist: Sure. There have been thousands. I could name a dozen just off the top of my head: the Bororo, the Baining, the Onondaga, the Wintu, the Ema, the Tallensi, the Vezo… All without violence or hierarchy.
Skeptic: But those are all a bunch of primitives! I’m talking about anarchism in a modern, technological society.
Anarchist: Okay, then. There have been all sorts of successful experiments: experiments with worker‟s self-management, like Mondragon; economic projects based on the idea of the gift economy, like Linux; all sorts of political organizations based on consensus and direct democracy…
Skeptic: Sure, sure, but these are small, isolated examples. I‟m talking about whole societies.
Anarchist: Well, it’s not like people haven’t tried. Look at the Paris Commune, the free states in Ukraine and Shimin, the 1936 revolution in Spain…
Skeptic: Yeah, and look what happened to those guys! They all got killed!
The dice are loaded. You can‟t win. Because when the skeptic says “society,” what he really means is “state,” even “nation-state.” Since no one is going to produce an example of an anarchist state—that would be a contradiction in terms—what we‟re really being asked for is an example of a modern nation-state with the government somehow plucked away: a situation in which the government of Canada, to take a random example, has been overthrown, or for some reason abolished itself, and no new one has taken its place but instead all former Canadian citizens begin to organize themselves into libertarian collectives. Obviously this would never be allowed to happen. In the past, whenever it even looked like it might—here, the Paris commune and Spanish civil war are excellent examples—the politicians running pretty much every state in the vicinity have been willing to put their differences on hold until those trying to bring such a situation about had been rounded up and shot.
There is a way out, which is to accept that anarchist forms of organization would not look anything like a state. That they would involve an endless variety of communities, associations, networks, projects, on every conceivable scale, overlapping and intersecting in any way we could imagine, and possibly many that we can‟t. Some would be quite local, others global. Perhaps all they would have in common is that none would involve anyone showing up with weapons and telling everyone else to shut up and do what they were told. And that, since anarchists are not actually trying to seize power within any national territory, the process of one system replacing the other will not take the form of some sudden revolutionary cataclysm—the storming of a Bastille, the seizing of a Winter Palace—but will necessarily be gradual, the creation of alternative forms of organization on a world scale, new forms of communication, new, less alienated ways of organizing life, which will, eventually, make currently existing forms of power seem stupid and beside the point. That in turn would mean that there are endless examples of viable anarchism: pretty much any form of organization would count as one, so long as it was not imposed by some higher authority, from a klezmer band to the international postal service.” —David Graeber (via slamdanceonyourgrave)
Yet *ANOTHER* post on sex-selective abortions on the rise in India. What is it? Coconut season? Anyway, the gem is this:
In a culture where, as the Times notes, sons inherit property and carry on the family name but daughters do not, girls are also more vulnerable to infanticide, abuse and neglect.
So remind me again, in which culture are people who present or identify as women *NOT* susceptible to abuse, neglect, violence etc? As some people seem to think, I’m not saying female foeticide is ‘okay’ — I’d rather talk to you about bullfrogs instead of even suggesting it’s ‘okay’. My question is, why is the data not investigated? Why do people not question the resources that these posts quote? And ignore factors such as:
— Dalit and tribal communities are largely written *out* of such censuses, or as I mentioned yesterday, forced to undergo coercive sterilisations.
— The census is conducted in official languages (Hindi, English, Marathi, Telegu, Bengali etc). So people who speak in dialects again get written out of such counts.
— Stop framing us as people who are *exclusively* sexist, that this only happens in Dusty Corners Of The World.
— These censuses club together the abortions that sex-workers, hijra people, queer women who get ‘correctively raped’ and don’t want to carry *those* fetuses to term are all branched under sex-selective abortions.
Next time you want to write about [x] issue in the ‘third world’, don’t frame us as people ‘inferior’ to you. Yes, in our societies and communities, female presenting-identifying-passing-whathaveyou people are at a considerable disadvantage, but remember things are not so different in your societies either.
So until any western feminists don’t view third world women as “ourselves undressed”, till then I have no hope or expectations for the uneven power dichotomy to shift.
So till then, fuck you.
As usual, Jaded is spot on. The fundamental problem with mainstream feminism right now is the unequal balance of power that allows western feminists (who are also predominantly white, abled, cis, and het) to universalize their experiences. But then, this is not a new revelation to readers of the Hub and our attendant contributors, no?
Racism: A Primer~*
Racism is sociologically defined (and therefore not going to be used in the DICTIONARY) as policies and practices put into place to enforce hierarchies. These hierarchies are also known as ways to keep white people in power.
In short, racism = prejudice + power. Power being the way that white people exert their power just by having white skin. Although race is a biological concept and therefore it has no place in being used in conversations tied to one’s worth, it is still used as a tool to support racism.
Being the good citizen that I am I have uploaded some amazing articles written by mostly men (so hopefully you will take them more to heart but some of these men aren’t white so idk) who have degrees and shit in sociology and this is taken as fact and this is their life’s work. They have been published in journals! Read them.
Works on post-racial/post-privilege:
- Becoming Post-White: Robert Elliot Fox
- The Persisten Power of Race: Harrison
- White Americans, The New Minority? (THIS ARTICLE IS NOT WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE IN THE TITLE SO FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DON’T CITE IT WITHOUT READING IT): Warren and Twine
- From Bi-racial to tri-racial (something about exploring racial stratification): Bonila - Silva
*THE MOST IMPORTANT TEXT YOU WILL READ. IF YOU DON’T CARE ABOUT THE REST OF THE POST I HIGHLY RECOMMEND IT
And then you go on to say wow but racism is only in America!1!! Something about Africa to disprove my theory!!!
Racism in South Africa:
- From Racial Class to Apartheid: Bond
- Beyond Racism (discusses in SA, Brazil, and the US): Fredrickson
Racism in Brazil:
Racism in Germany:
Racism in Europe:
*also good one on who’s allowed to culture and who is not
The only reason I am doing this is because I can’t just keep trying to explain this to people and I think it’s a damn fucking shame that people do not want to learn about this. Additionally, I have the privilege of taking a solid class on this but I did learn from the internet. There is some privilege in learning but in no way should I have to put up with racist and sexist remarks everyday (online or off) and be okay with it.
how about I punch you in the face and you shut up, is that a better option?
Bro I uphold the oppressive inequalities of centuries past bro, look how logical and informed this makes me look bro.
drippingbeards replied to your post: “thingsthatreallyreallyannoyme” is following me… is this for real? why would this happen? haha.
that blog was recommended to me and rage exploded out of my ever orifice as soon as i laid eyes on it, oh god
Yeah there have been times when I’ve just looked at a page or two of it and it is the most disgusting shit I’ve ever seen.
He sent me messages a few months ago like HAY BRO, YOU SHOULDN’T CARE ABOUT OPPRESSING PEOPLE BRO, I FEEL SORRY FOR YOU BRO, CENSORSHIP BRO, FREEDOM OF SPEECH BRO, FEMINAZIS BRO, BRO BRO, ERROR BRO, ERROR BRO BRO, BRO BRO BRO.
Please do not engage him in debate, it will just frustrate you. He will never move from his multiple bullshitty stances, and all you would do is increase the popularity of his blog. His responses to you would be seen as victories by his supporters.
I recommend you block him actually, so that he doesn’t undermine you at every turn. That’s why he’s probably following you, to look out for important social justice issues to derail.
It might be that I can stand him less than others can, but oh god that guy…
**Trigger warning for anti-choice privilege-denial, punishment threats**
“in an earlier post, you said if abortion was outlawed, you would like to see both the doctor and woman punished. what about the father of the child?”
“I think the punishment should be mandatory mass attendance for 25 years.”
I FUCKING QUIT.
Hahaha what will mass attendance do exactly? Is church a punishment now? Is everyone in the world Christian? Omg I swear they create more questions than they actually answer.
Anyway, now I know it’s *cool* to talk about brownness and blackness and every other polka-dotted hue you can, because the Big White Feminists are doing it, so I guess it’s ‘hip’ now.
It’s great that you’re talking about us. Now I just have one thing to add, if you could just address the staggering fail that is perpetuated by white western feminism, in the comment sections of *your blogs itself*, so much so that it’s generally an unsafe space for anyone who doesn’t subscribe to the white, western, cis, able-bodied and middle class brand of Feminism it would be great.
So till then, fuck you.
Also they only speak to non-white people who are already part of their group. Like there are heaps of POC who they could ask to blog on their site, speak to, reference properly etc.
Bolding mine. This happens *so* often at Feministe!, Feministing and Pandagon that I don’t look at the comments EVER anymore. And so many times we’re told how to *manage* our experiences with racism. Does anyone else find it ironic from where this is coming from?
Oh my gosh, I love her!
SAME. She follows 650 people though so I’m no special snowflake hahaha.
You can’t say “self diagnosis is unhelpful at best” when people have had good experiences with it.
SERIOUSLY WORDS MEAN THINGS AND REALITY EXISTS YOU CAN’T JUST MAKE SHIT UP.
I can say “Seeking psychiatric help is unhelpful at best because psychiatrists are abusive assholes” which, while it’s pretty much my experience, IS NOT UNIVERSAL AT ALL.
Stop being assholes and stop trying to center systems that are frequently abusive. I mean really.
“The DSM-IV-TR states, because it is produced for the completion of federal legislative mandates, its use by people without clinical training can lead to inappropriate application of its contents. Appropriate use of the diagnostic criteria is said to require extensive clinical training, and its contents “cannot simply be applied in a cookbook fashion”. The APA notes diagnostic labels are primarily for use as a “convenient shorthand” among professionals. The DSM advises laypersons should consult the DSM only to obtain information, not to make diagnoses, and people who may have a mental disorder should be referred to psychological counseling or treatment.”
Self-diagnosis will get you nowhere. Don’t do it!
My opinion of self diagnosis is to use it as a stepping stone to treatment, but definitely not as a lifelong reason as to what your symptoms or actions may be. Professionals actually understand what is going on and what this is. I know a lot of people think they understand a disorder due to how it is explained in the DSM, but unless you thoroughly know the symptoms through training, self diagnosis as a long term thing can be really risky.
This is only my opinion of self diagnosis, and I’ve always thought that it starts with a person feeling they might have this disorder, then seeking treatment for it.
This isn’t an anti-self diagnosis statment. Rather that self diagnosis should be followed up with treatment to assure your inklings of thought. Then you question, well what if I don’t have the money to seek treatment. That’s the problem with the healthcare system, and that’s why we need to fix it.
Absolutely agree! It can be a great spur to help-seeking, but self-diagnosing alone without seeking professional help / treatment and attempting to go down these routes oneself can be unhelpful at best and dangerous at worst.
No, self-diagnosis can be right and re-affirming at best. And how “dangerous,” really? Especially in comparison to professional diagnosis. Like, I know a doctor who diagnosed someone with depression, gave her antidepressants, and then watched in horror as the patient (who was actually bipolar) wound up in the hospital after a manic episode. OOPS.
Also: professional diagnosis is extraordinarily, systematically flawed. ADHD is over-diagnosed in assigned-male children and under-diagnosed in assigned-female children (like, I have the attention span of a goldfish, but I didn’t get a professional diagnosis until I was 17). Borderline personality disorder has the opposite problem. And then there’s the fact that the DSM itself actually sets up autism as mutually exclusive to OCD. Which is like the falsest fucking thing: I’m autistic, and it does give me some very OCD-like things, but I just fundamentally do not have OCD. Other autistic people do. Very often, we can recognize this even when professionals can’t.
And I don’t know a single person who self-diagnosed themselves only using the DSM (and I know a lot of people who self-diagnosed). We do extensive research: we read the blogs of people who have whatever disability/illness we think we might, we read ridiculous “wahhh-my-kids-are-broken” guides written to the parents of kids with whatever it is that we have, we find case studies.
Or, some of us do. I imagine the average self-diagnosed person is just about as scrupulous as the average psychiatrist.
Just weighing in here because for the first time I can:
My self-diagnosis was actually far more thorough than my medical diagnosis. I took two very detailed tests, read about the symptoms and have studied the illness in my degree.
The doctor had me do two 5 question measures and said ‘yes, you’re probably right’. There wasn’t the scientific rigour assumed by the OP. Doctors and scientists can always help but they aren’t perfect, and a little research certainly won’t hurt.