🔥 Popular | Latest

Being Alone, Bad, and Family: NEW EPISODE CN CARTOETw I WAS TERRIBLE TO YOU. I LIKED TAKING EVERYTHING OUT ON YO.. beta-kindergarten: Because this is, for whatever reason being discussed again in the tags, here’s just another reminder to everyone, and especially to my fellow survivors who see themselves in Jasper: SU has /never/ been ambiguous regarding who was in control of malachite. It was undoubtedly Lapis up until SWI, and even then you could say she and Jasper were working together to fight the CGs. Abuse by definition NEEDS to have a power imbalance between the victim and abuser. Jasper was never allowed that power, while Lapis is always described as the one who was in control, therefore Lapis was the abuser and Jasper was the victim. Victims aren’t always good people. Jasper is very much a victim of circumstance, both from the war and from Malachite. Yes, she’s abusive, but towards the corrupted gems, and has yet to be given a chance to unlearn her toxic behaviors. She’s a messy victim, she’s aggressive and angry, and there are so many survivors who act like this; and guess what, they’re still victims. Having “ugly” symptoms and feeling affection for your abuser does NOT make you the abuser of the relationship. It doesn’t undermine your abuse and certainly doesn’t justify it, no matter what vitriol this fandom tries to spew at you because you see Jasper as the victim. Abusers aren’t always going to be your enemy. They aren’t always going to be bigger than you, or physically stronger. They can be friends or family or “beach summer fun buddies”. They can be nice sometimes and absolutely terrible other times. And they can also have traumas of their own. This doesn’t change or excuse the fact that they’re abusive. Lapis is this kind of abuser. She was the one holding the chains, the one who acknowledges her own power (and fears being placed in positions of control because of it), and the one who regrets her decisions and is trying to stop being abusive. Frankly I don’t care about protagonist centered morality enough to even consider Steven’s point of view regarding Malachite. I don’t care what the CGs in the show have to say about the situation because regardless of how much of a “terrible” person Jasper is, it’s presented clearly to us who was the one being held in chains against their will. I also cannot be bothered to care about your definitions of “lashing out” or, “self-blaming”. Lapis made her intentions painfully clear that this was for revenge and wanting to take out everything on someone. She doesn’t love the earth nor does she want to play nice with the CGs. So don’t even try to tell me this because I’m frankly just /tired/ of being reminded that you people don’t actually care about victims if our behaviors or coping mechanisms are “wrong” to you. Also, of the 2 years that I’ve been involved in this hell fandom I’ve yet to see Jasper fans attack the inboxes or posts of Lapis fans to the same extent that the reverse has been done. Jasper fans don’t spread ugly rumors about Rebecca Sugar’s abuse history either, so it’s pretty ironic that WE’RE the ones who condone abuse isn’t it? tl;dr: You’re honestly disgusting if you’ve EVER tried to make a victim feel bad for liking Jasper, and I sincerely hope you grow up some day and learn that it’s not worth it to harm real people and survivors for the sake of a cartoon. And if you’re a victim who relates to Jasper, believe me when I say you aren’t alone and you aren’t a bad person. Keep doing you. ✌️

beta-kindergarten: Because this is, for whatever reason being discussed again in the tags, here’s just another reminder to everyone, and es...

Save
Doctor, Gif, and Google: Trisha Greenhalgh #FBPE @trishgreenhalgh Doctor: Don't confuse your Google search with my 6y at medical school. Patient: Don't confuse the 1-hour lecture you had on my condition with my 20y of living with it. 5:30 AM May 26, 2018 7.4K Retweets 22.8K Likes val-ritz: dreaming-in-circles: magickinmundane: pr0dr0me: licensetomurse: meanwhileonwednesday: As a medical professional and a medically complicated human this is very important to me That’s not wrong. These are both true Both are very very true. These are both true, but more importantly, not mutually exclusive! Say a patient comes in with chest pain. First time they’ve ever had chest pain. They say they googled it, and clearly they have cancer now! …no. That’s the first example. But say a patient has chest pain, they’ve had chest pain for 10 years, every previous doctor has checked for all the obvious causes, and nothing changes. That’s a completely different scenario. In the first example, the patient doesn’t know what they’re talking about. The condition is new, their knowledge is limited. That’s why we have doctors. But in the second example, the patient is the expert, and the doctor is the one who’s new to the situation. The patient has done all this before, and is very familiar with the pain (condition, etc.) that they have. The doctor is not the one with 10 years of experience. They need to listen, because the patient actually has something they don’t know to add to the conversation. These two things are not mutually exclusive, they are not the same scenario, and both doctors and patients (but mostly doctors) need to learn to tell the difference and know when to talk, and when to listen. This is also *highly* relevant to anti-vaxers. There is a reason that the entire section on dysthymia in my psychology textbooks is basically “this person has been living with this for years longer than you will ever have researched it. help them facilitate their own coping strategies.”

val-ritz: dreaming-in-circles: magickinmundane: pr0dr0me: licensetomurse: meanwhileonwednesday: As a medical professional and a medic...

Save
Beijing, Definitely, and Guns: BANG BANG WE CAN END GUN VIOLENCE. xphilosoraptorx: unlimited-shitpost-works: siryouarebeingmocked: 8lastrat8: american–support: kasaron: allriot-political-tshirts: American citizens own 40% of all guns in the world. Out of more than one billion firearms in the world, American citizens hold 393 million, for a population of roughly 326 million. That’s a lot of guns! The last time the US federal government managed to pass laws that limit the spread and use of guns was 25 years ago. It was 1994. The Federal Assault Weapons Ban was temporary. It expired in 2004, resulting in a massive increase in mass shootings across the country. Republicans are running out of excuses, blaming the latest incidents in Drayton and El Paso on video games. We can end gun violence. Let’s start with gun control. What sort of gun control legislation would you like to see be put into place? OP, that claim of shootings increased is false. The violence and shootings didn’t change in that decade from the previous decade, and in fact, violence has been on the decline. WHAT HAS CHANGED is how much media is shoved down your throat. Thats it. The nonstop spam from legacy media of a single event for a month, if not months on end is what changed. It used to be a 5, maybe 10 minute story has now turned into a 4 week “constant coverage” of spewing the same info daily, with nothing added. After the early 90s, we saw a sharp decline and its been declining ever since. Meanwhile, ownership is at an alltime high, increasing, as if a plethora of armed citizens reduces the audacity of a potential killer to attempt knowing they’ll get capped. What has also changed is the increase in the absolutely terrible idea of “gun free zones” seeing as approximately 85-95% of these shootings are occuring in these zones. Seems like that’s your problem. Hmm, this graph seems to showcase that despite the US owning vastly more guns… homicide rate is lower than a hefty chunk of even the non gun owners… I’d just like to know how they propose to take our guns. If I got one logical explanation from one of these half wits that didn’t include magic or ridiculous gestapo tactics we could have a conversation but, every F’ing time it devolves into name calling, insults, and slander. They simply can’t explain how to take the guns away. Not a single one of them has ever responded to me without crass vulgarities and irrational screeching. myamberreason said:  Anyway, guys, why you need THAT many guns? I understand owned a few for protection or legal hunting, but why do you have around 40% of firearms in the world?? I’m sorry, are you implying the Yanks should meet international proportional quotas on guns? We do own a few for self-defense and hunting. It’s just that the rest of the world doesn’t own very many guns. The reason we all have so many guns is very simple: logistics. The point of the second amendment is for us, the citizens of the USA, to be “shit your pants, wake up in a cold sweat” terrifying to the people running this country, so much so that they involuntarily have second, third, even fourth thoughts about ever violating our rights. The 2nd amendment is the most important and most powerful of all the amendments. Every single right and amendment could taken away, and we could regain them all with that one. And I’m not the only one who recognizes the importance of the 2nd.And it definitely terrifies Beijing. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I don’t have to justify an amount of guns to you any more than I have to justify how many video games or coffee cups I have.
Save