wow im sure glad nobody has ever had a housing situation complicated by the end of a monogamous relationship before its not like its a leading cause of homelessness in women or anything i guess polyamory is just uniquely degenerate evil

this you, anon?

[edit of the xkcd #385 How It Works where text is replaced with "wow, you suck at relationships" and "wow, poly relationships suck"]

the floating is ROUGH 😭 but i also get involuntary twitches??

tbh i think the funniest phenomena that's been happening in the last couple years is "youtuber, having gone too deep into the research hole, has been made an investigative journalist against their will"

Shout out to the guy who wanted to do some fun & silly little reviews but uncovered an illegal gambling operation

(Review 2)

this guy started out poking fun at australian politicians and ended up investigating the firebombing of his own home, during which he uncovered connections between the same politician he was making fun of + major organized crime

"So I did what any normal person would do, okay? I bought a hat and some makeup and disguised myself so that I could go undercover and do some digging on what I thought could be an illegal gambling operation that was fronting as a kebab restaurant."

Amazing.

Any modern reboot of Scooby Doo should make Shaggy a restaurant review youtuber

you know what? coy has more faith in humans than i do. i would have immediately assumed the review on the place next to "lucky's diner" not to be a mistake, but to be a full-on faked review, and upon inspecting the profile and seeing the same review left on another business, assumed that business to also be part of the illegal gambling operation and that the reviewer was "lucky" the whole time.

I know folks have been sharing this link on other posts, but &udm=14 works well:

You can add it as an extension to Firefox now: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/udm14/reviews/

awesome drink coolstyle

This is true btw

Protect trans kids at all costs 💜

everyone look at my red hood bike ok thanks bye

once again thinking about jason as duke’s robin. he’s ~4 years younger than jason, and that’s puts him at 8-12 during Jason’s time as robin. that’s prime time to get attached to your local kid vigilante before your own life goes downhill.

and if we try to keep duke’s meeting with bruce in zero year + duke’s age (so he can remember the meeting and hold that conversation with bruce), he has to be around 8. if he starts following batman through the news at that time, the robin he sees is jason. I’ve literally connected the dots

jason as robin comforting duke while rescuing him and then then years later, jason encourages duke using the same words during a mission and duke (who has repeated that memory in his head a thousand times because that was robin talking to him) just has an epiphany and realizes jason was the second robin so he pauses in the middle of a high stakes mission to go “AREN’T YOU DEAD”

#Jason’s like that’s pretty common knowledge bud#and dukes like NO NOT YOU I MEAN YOUUUUU!#Jason’s absolutely baffled

tags via @starlooove

Jason thinks he hit his head a few too many times and that's how the Signal costume ends up with a helmet

I feel like I confused people at the second last post so: duke knows that red hood died at some point (he thinks it’s funny, even) and he knows that robin ii died. But he didn’t know they were the same person

searching for nash playlists is so funny, everyone just uses The Nash photo for their covers

this is unrelated to the content of your actual post but i need you to know that i've started to quote nash in my everyday life and this is 🫵 your fault

I ALWAYS FORGET YOU DID READ THE INHERITANCE GAMES !!!! okay i gotta know what ur quoting specifically though 😭

"no such thing as fighting dirty if you win"

had to wait 8 hours for this response, but i am not disappointed in the slightest

the idea that restrooms, locker rooms, etc need to be single-sex spaces in order for women to be safe is patriarchy's way of signalling to men & boys that society doesn't expect them to behave themselves around women. it is directly antifeminist. it would be antifeminist even if trans people did not exist. a feminist society would demand that women should be safe in all spaces even when there are men there.

btw this is maybe the single most key distinguishing feature of the terfy strains of radical feminism, the seed all the rest of it springs out of: they have absolutely no faith in the ability of feminism to actually destroy patriarchy. they do not think feminism can truly build a better world. they cannot really even imagine that possibility. they think patriarchy is an inevitable natural consequence of unchangeable biological facts, and therefore the goal of feminism can only be to mitigate the worst effects of patriarchy, not to get rid of it.

they can imagine a society where women get some designated safe spaces without men around. they cannot imagine a society where the presence of men is not inherently a danger to women.

I get the point of the post but as a hijabi woman, I’d not be able to even comb my hair in a public bathroom if it’s not gendered? Everything cannot be, and is not, as black and white as this honestly. Not everything is about patriarchy, sometimes it’s about comfort too. I personally won’t want to adjust my clothes or comb my hair in front of men I feel absolutely safe around either. Let alone change? And I’m sure there are non-hijabi women who feel the same?? How come this kind of feminism doesn’t take things like this into consideration? It’s just weird to me.

people have the right to privacy. people do not have the right to get that privacy through dividing up the population around them

the way for people to get the opportunity to change or otherwise groom away from people they might not feel comfortable doing so around is not single-gender spaces that provide that opportunity only for people where that division comes from gender, it's individual spaces

(and of course any gender division is going to be inexact, anyway. combing your hair in a women's bathroom still allows for the possibility of being seen by, say, a closeted trans man)

The way my point went right over your head is laughable. But then again, we are used to our opinion and choice and comfort thrown in the dumpster for the sake of “feminism” which silences our voices so idk what I expected. We are used to casual Islamophobia which disregards our needs and brushes us off as nothing.

I didn’t claim I want to magically make people come out as trans for my comfort (the way you’ve used a trans man as a gotcha is kinda sickening) but I guess I trust closeted trans men more than you do to avert their gaze if they’re aware that I’m a hijabi. I was only talking about my comfort being taken into consideration too, not throw it away to make a point. One hypothetical trans man not coming out isn’t an excuse to not give me the privacy I need.

People actually do have the right to divide up the population around them, we are not all the same gender. Equality is about accepting the existence of all genders, not lumping all of them up together and refusing to see that there are multiple genders. The idea that you cannot split the population and give the right space to the right people, trans and non-binary included, itself is a terf notion. The idea that only by making everything unisex is the way trans people can get their rights is a transphobic notion.

No, you don't have that right. Or, rather, you can do whatever splits you want conceptually, inside your own head, but you do not have a right to demand physically split up spaces by gender.

For any number of reasons, really, but regarding the topic at hand because accepting the existence of trans and nonbinary people means accepting that gender is not a rigid categorisation system, the borders are porous, and where people fit in it can be unclear.

Socially enforced gender-segregated spaces means, among other things, that you need to police what gender people are. I am hoping I don't need to spell out why that is a problem for trans and nonbinary acceptance.

Why is your personal comfort not adequately served by individual rather than gender-segregated spaces, and why is that personal comfort so important that you want to impose gender segregation on the public in general?

When I was using the women's locker room and bathroom as a trans man who did not look male enough to use the men's rooms but still absolutely identified as a man, it would not have occurred to me to avert my eyes from a hijabi woman (although it never happened so I haven't been tested). I'm ashamed to admit that but it's true. My approach in was basically I'm no different than when I didn't know I was a man, and so long as nobody knows we all seem to be reasonably comfortable, AND especially for the locker room the gym told me it's their policy that I use the locker room that matches the gender on my drivers license and it's probably safest to carry that logic everywhere until I looked fully like a man and changed my papers. Closeted trans men are a reality, not a hypothetical, thank you very much, and as much as it sucks it's probably safer for a hijabi to use a stall for hair brushing and changing than it is to force trans men and women into the men's bathroom.

Of course the real solution is to introduce more individual spaces. That way everyone can feel safe, no matter their reason for wanting privacy. Dividing by gender only approximates privacy and leaves out everyone whose gender doesn't fit into cis categories, as well as everyone who doesn't get safety, privacy, or comfort by being divided into men and women. (And also men, cis or trans, with babies who have to use the women's because that's where the changing table is and men, cis or trans, with young daughters because the men's room isn't safe or comfortable for them.)

Former summercamp staff here! If its any merit to your argument, after implementing single unit, locking showers as opposed to separate girls and boys shower houses, we saw way less instances of showerhouse harassment between teens (most of which would qualify as sexual harassment given the subject and/or location)

Hell, it was costly to implement, but because there was this new individualized privacy, older boys couldnt single out younger boys who were less developed, girls couldn’t pick on heavier girls, and anyone who wasnt nestled perfectly into the gender binary didn’t have to weigh which room they felt more comfortable in vs. which room they would be safer in.

There was certainly still bullying and teasing that went under the radar, teenagers can be straight up cruel, but the reported incidents were down by something like 85% in a single summer because we tried to give everybody a bit of privacy instead of trying to monitor ‘safe spaces’.

We dubbed it ‘the porta potty effect’

Individual, non-gendered spaces are the way forward. There are a bunch of reasons why a person might want or need privacy. The best way to make it available is to make it the default, eliminating the need to request it justify it.