Avatar

Better Safe than Dead

@hiccup-queen / hiccup-queen.tumblr.com

I'm Rachel, and yes - I have, in fact, had hiccups since September of 2014.
Avatar

how fucking arrogant can you be to think any eugenics program could ever weed out “fascist genetics”. even if the “dark triad” was a reliable precursor to fascist ideology and even if “dark triad traits” could be reliably linked to genotype (they aren’t and they can’t be), how fucking far to jupiter are you if you think you can remove it from a population of seven billion, let alone in some “anarchist” manner? how do you programmatically sterilize anyone in an “anarchist” manner?

Avatar
ms-demeanor

Do you ever see some discourse float by and think “Maybe I’m not hanging out on the worst parts of Tumblr, actually”

jesus fucking christ

Avatar

THAT FIRST SITE IS EVERY WRITER’S DREAM DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY TIMES I’VE TRIED WRITING SOMETHING AND THOUGHT GOD DAMN IS THERE A SPECIFIC WORD FOR WHAT I’M USING TWO SENTENCES TO DESCRIBE AND JUST GETTING A BUNCH OF SHIT GOOGLE RESULTS

Avatar
deanofbeans

OMG

Avatar
dduane

This one’s an always-reblog, because who knows who needs it and hasn’t seen it yet?

Avatar
Avatar
ssundiall

guys i need you to realize that smoking ANYTHING will cause damage to your lungs. inhaling smoke is just inherently bad for you im sorry.

coming from a chronic weed smoker: YOU ARE NOT IMMUNE TO LUNG DAMAGE JUST BECAUSE IT ISNT NICOTINE!!!!!

btw the message of this post is not "dont ever do anything harmful for your body" its "know the risks of whatever vices you participate in"

Weed can be so hard to get impartial information about, because most of the studies you will read are either coming from the "dreaded reefer marihuanna will make your brain melt right out your butthole" camp, OR the "cannabis is Mother Gaia's magic potion that will make your cancer explode right off your dick" camp. But it seems like we all generally agree that:

It's not analogous to alcohol, or nicotine, or opioids, or anything else really

It's way more potent than it used to be, so any study from about more than 10 years ago is practically talking about a different plant entirely

It's not harmful to an adult brain, like it all, as long as you're not eating stupidly massive doses of it on the reg

It is harmful to a developing brain though, and your brain keeps developing a lot older than you think

It is absolutely not chemically addictive, we are certain about this, like someone could theoretically get addicted to weed in the same way someone could theoretically get addicted to sweeping their floors, in that if you are addicted to it, the thing isn't really the main problem

It will always be a canary in the coal mine issue that signals a backwards slide into conservatism

And

Even the healthiest possible way to smoke it is still putting hot black smoke in your tender pink little lungs

Avatar
hiccup-queen

Also important to note: it slows down your digestive system. If you smoke regularly and keep throwing up, stop smoking weed and see if it helps. It's called cyclic vomiting.

"But weed helps with nausea-" not when the problem is a paralyzed gut. It just makes it worse.

Avatar
Avatar
fremedon

For U.S. folks, a guide to state supreme court races in your state this year: https://boltsmag.org/your-state-by-state-guide-to-the-2024-supreme-court-elections/

These downballot races can have a huge impact on life in your state. If you have judges on the ballot this year, please read up on the race!

Avatar
petymology

It's hard to feel like an informed voter in judicial elections - candidates don't make the news. Here's one resource I like:

Avatar
Avatar
t4tails

does anybody remember when ship names would be changed depending on who they thought topped. that shit was so funny just a BRUTAL civil war between a group that ships the same characters but cannot agree on who takes it up the ass

Avatar

🔹 Someone else's fiction cannot cause you physical harm.

🔹If someone else's fiction is causing you emotional or psychological harm, or distress, you can put it down and not read/watch it.

🔹Your emotional well-being is not the responsibility of fiction writers.

🔹Someone else's fiction is not about your personal trauma.

🔹When reading or watching fiction, you always have the power. You can always stop. You are never reading fiction without your own consent.

🔹Fiction writers are not responsible for other people's mental health.

🔹The content of a piece of fiction does not reflect on the morality of its author.

🔹Just because someone writes about bad things happening, doesn't mean they want those things to happen.

🔹Don't like? Don't read.

Avatar
roach-works

-a writer's only job is to tell their story. they have no responsibility to you for how it makes you feel. you chose to consume the story. so those are your feelings that you need to take ownership of.

-discomfort is not the same as harm and acclimating yourself via fiction to strongly unpleasant emotions such as sorrow, indignation, and disgust will make you stronger and healthier

-however if you are repeatedly triggering yourself by engaging with media that makes you miserable you should probably recognize that it's up to you to stop hurting yourself

Avatar
Avatar
gay-for-frog

Rapists, and killers, too? Really? (Those on death-row?) The drug/prostitution problems are just a portion of USA criminals.

yes, all criminals. the moment you say “except X criminal” is the moment that people will try to convict their opponents as having committed X crime.

it’s the same thing as what’s going on right now with people equating drag to some sort of child exploitation. “but the children!!” they wail, and people listen because oh, if drag is harming children, then drag MUST be BAD, so we HAVE TO BAN DRAG.

do you understand what i’m saying? you can’t take away the rights of any category of criminal, because suddenly that category will be overflowing with people who totally 100% definitely committed that horrible crime.

Avatar
captain-acab

Just to look at this from one step further back, let's accept the premise. Let's imagine that there is a type of crime that is 1) horrible evil irredeemable universally-agreed-upon bad, and 2) could somehow be prosecuted with 100% accuracy and 0% bias. Yes, even then, those criminals deserve a right to vote.

Do you they're going to like vote themselves out of jail? Vote to make murder legal? What exactly are you afraid of.

Realistically they'll just... vote just like anyone else. They'll help elect city councilmembers they think will better their hometowns, and presidents they think will best serve the country. They might even vote in their own interests! To reform prisons, fund rehabilitation programs, and outlaw predatory practices by telecoms. Are you saying you don't want any of those things?

And even if there were one of those super-duper-unambiguously-evil totally misanthropic death-row convicts, who's scheduled to be execute the very next day and just wants to sow chaos and watch the outside world burn however they can... what's the worst they could do, vote republican?

Taking people's rights away isn't bad because it might happen to someone you like, it's because taking people's rights away is bad.

Avatar
Avatar
superlinguo

Blind people gesture (and why that’s kind of a big deal)

People who are blind from birth will gesture when they speak. I always like pointing out this fact when I teach classes on gesture, because it gives us an an interesting perspective on how we learn and use gestures. Until now I’ve mostly cited a 1998 paper from Jana Iverson and Susan Goldin-Meadow that analysed the gestures and speech of young blind people. Not only do blind people gesture, but the frequency and types of gestures they use does not appear to differ greatly from how sighted people gesture. If people learn gesture without ever seeing a gesture (and, most likely, never being shown), then there must be something about learning a language that means you get gestures as a bonus.

Blind people will even gesture when talking to other blind people, and sighted people will gesture when speaking on the phone - so we know that people don’t only gesture when they speak to someone who can see their gestures.

Earlier this year a new paper came out that adds to this story. Şeyda Özçalışkan, Ché Lucero and Susan Goldin-Meadow looked at the gestures of blind speakers of Turkish and English, to see if the *way* they gestured was different to sighted speakers of those languages. Some of the sighted speakers were blindfolded and others left able to see their conversation partner.

Turkish and English were chosen, because it has already been established that speakers of those languages consistently gesture differently when talking about videos of items moving. English speakers will be more likely to show the manner (e.g. ‘rolling’ or bouncing’) and trajectory (e.g. ‘left to right’, ‘downwards’) together in one gesture, and Turkish speakers will show these features as two separate gestures. This reflects the fact that English ‘roll down’ is one verbal clause, while in Turkish the equivalent would be yuvarlanarak iniyor, which translates as two verbs ‘rolling descending’.

Since we know that blind people do gesture, Özçalışkan’s team wanted to figure out if they gestured like other speakers of their language. Did the blind Turkish speakers separate the manner and trajectory of their gestures like their verbs? Did English speakers combine them? Of course, the standard methodology of showing videos wouldn’t work with blind participants, so the researchers built three dimensional models of events for people to feel before they discussed them.

The results showed that blind Turkish speakers gesture like their sighted counterparts, and the same for English speakers. All Turkish speakers gestured significantly differently from all English speakers, regardless of sightedness. This means that these particular gestural patterns are something that’s deeply linked to the grammatical properties of a language, and not something that we learn from looking at other speakers.

References

Jana M. Iverson & Susan Goldin-Meadow. 1998. Why people gesture when they speak. Nature, 396(6708), 228-228.

Şeyda Özçalışkan, Ché Lucero and Susan Goldin-Meadow. 2016. Is Seeing Gesture Necessary to Gesture Like a Native Speaker? Psychological Science 27(5) 737–747.

Asli Ozyurek & Sotaro Kita. 1999. Expressing manner and path in English and Turkish: Differences in speech, gesture, and conceptualization. In Twenty-first Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 507-512). Erlbaum.

Avatar
Avatar
cherryhomo

reblog this w your weirdest fear!!! mine’s balloons

I said weirdest not deepest! stop reblogging this w shit like ‘my life falling apart’ and ‘intimacy’ and have fun!! be scared of figurines or something damn

You are using an unsupported browser and things might not work as intended. Please make sure you're using the latest version of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or Edge.