Stole borrowed this from @quinngefail bc I wanna draw some expressions and get some practice
“Authors should not be ALLOWED to write about–” you are an anti-intellectual and functionally a conservative
“This book should be taken off of shelves for featuring–” you are an anti-intellectual and functionally a conservative
“Schools shouldn’t teach this book in class because–” you are an anti-intellectual and functionally a conservative
“Nobody actually likes or wants to read classics because they’re–” you are an anti-intellectual and an idiot
“I only read YA fantasy books because every classic novel or work of literary fiction is problematic and features–” you are an anti-intellectual and you are robbing yourself of the full richness of the human experience.
"you are functionally a conservative" is such a good and clarifying insult
Literally right after I saw this post, I saw another post in a discord chat for BOOK EDITORS in which an outspokenly liberal editor talked about how Nabokov should have never been published because he wrote about p*dophiles and described women's bodies in ways that made her uncomfortable. She described his writing as "objectively terrible" and said she wanted to burn his books. And other editors were bringing up classics they didn't like and talking about how they wanted to throw them in the trash. This wasn't like a light "unpopular opinion!" conversation. This was actual book editors talking about how books should be destroyed and censored.
There is something so scary and toxic in global culture right now. The revival of fascism is influencing everyone's mindset and approach to art, regardless of where they fall on the political spectrum.
I see far more books being censored today than when I was a kid. Librarians handed me The Catcher in the Rye, The Sexual Politics of Meat, and Animal Farm when I was literally 8-11. My mom would never have taken a book away from me. I read everything from the Tao Te Ching to the Qur'an to atheist texts under my desk at school. Teachers thought nothing of it or encouraged it. Books seemed universally acknowledged as sacrosanct to me.
Now I can't find any adults who don't hesitate or want to make exceptions when it comes to censorship. Even the most liberal social activist librarians I know go, "well except for book X..."
Functionally conservative. It's so important to have the language to express that.
Thank you for this addition!
And, following up on the previous post …
“This makes me uncomfortable” is NOT a valid reason for censorship
These fucking book editors should remove themselves from the profession ASAP 😡
The only reason a book should be removed, the ONLY reason, is “we are keeping it in the restricted section for research because its only intended function is to cause harm.”
And to be clear, when I say this, I’m talking about shit like To Train Up A Child and The Protocols of Zion. One is a text responsible for the deaths of multiple children because it’s an abuse how-to, and the other is entirely fabricated “protocols” from a group that never actually existed but is claimed to represent all Jews, and it’s basically one long antisemitic screed.
And even these should be available. Just. Not where they’re gonna be used to start a white supremacist cult.
anyways reminder that scars of any kind are morally neutral and not bad or harmful to show. if that shit is healed and not a literal open wound it is not fucking bad. it is not okay to shame or trigger warning a normal fucking part of someone’s body, including and especially when it’s a sign of physical or mental illness.
look every single time I make posts like this someone comes on my post like “not self harm scars though! those are triggering!” and fucking. think about what you’re implying for just one second here. you’re saying that if anyone has ever even once hit a mental point where they harmed themself in a way that left a lasting mark they can never show their body uncensored again. this is okay to you? you think this is fucking okay?
also, to expand on this: do not assume you know what are and aren't self harm scars. i have 'traditional self harm scar' looking scars that are not self harm, just that i have a cat and scar easily. i have scars that do not look like self harm scars that very much are. you do not have the right to go up to someone and ask "hey, what are you scars from so i can decide if i can censor your body?", nor the right to assume the origin of someone's scars in order to censor their body. In general, no one's scars or any other part of their body is your business
[Image ID: Screenshot of tags from this post. The first tag is: the human condition can not be censored. The second tag is: and the human condition is fucking scarred. ./End ID]
neighborhoodcrow asked:
I find nightjars weird cause I expect them to have teeth instead of a beak. I think I blame anurognathids for this.
a-dinosaur-a-day answered:
Tbh, I feel if they could have teeth, they’d re evolve teeth
catboyfurby asked:
"birds aren't dinosaurs" ❌ wrong, misinformed, way too common
"all vertebrates evolved from fish, and are therefore technically fish" ✅ mischievous, technically true if you look at it from the right angle, demonstrates how cladistics work
"whales are fish but not for the reason you might think" 😈 this is funny to me specifically
a-dinosaur-a-day answered:
Whales technically being fish is the funniest about face evolution has given us
there's no such thing as a fish, but all mammals are fish, and whales are fish because they're mammals
IM A FISH??
once the magic spell starts taking place, then yes
Are you just saying that because it's a bottomfeeder?
i categorize my vertebrates by what the skin is covered in
so you put pangolins with lizards, elephants with people, birds' feet but not their bodies with crocodiles, and all furry things but not non-furry things (some, but not all mammals), as different groups?
*Holds up pangolin* BEHOLD, A LIZARD.
Anonymous asked:
Fnaf/muppets crossover where nigel is the security guard and the "animatronics" are all just normal humans. The springtrap-equivalent gets cornered and takes off their mask to reveal gonzo, who has been stuck in his "costume" for the last 3 days
adobe-outdesign answered:
it occurs to me that you probably mean Nigel (the director) because he’s the one having panic attacks over TV screens all day, but I initially thought you were talking about Nigel (the conductor) which would be funny because I don’t think he’s had an emotion since 1974
Ok, but if you’re an independent contractor in the US and this happens? Find a lawyer, because you might have just gotten a huge payday.
Your position was just referred to as employment. Independent contractors do not have employers; they do not have employment. Congrats, your contact at this company just provided evidence that you were illegally missclassified.
This contact is claiming that you have set hours you’re obligated to fulfill. Unless a work task can only be done at a set time for practical reasons (i.e. you’re an audio freelancer paid to support a live event that occurs at a particular time and requires a certain amount of pre-show setup), a company cannot set an independent contractor’s work hours. This is further evidence that you were missclassified.
The whole exchange establishes that the company is interpreting an employer-employee relationship rather than expecting a service. Discipline and potential for firing (you cannot fire an independent contractor; no longer purchasing their service is not equivalent) establish that this person views themselves as a manager. Independent contractors cannot have managers.
This one text exchange could:
- Get you back pay for the full duration you’ve worked there, to bring you up to the compensation that an employee would have gotten
- Get you back compensation for lost benefits that an employee would have gotten
- Get you back pay for the additional self-employment taxes the company should have covered
- Get the company to pay back taxes to the government
- Get the company to hire everyone who performed a similar role, or face further penalties and fines
- A win would encourage the rest of their missclassified workers to sue for the same, or give them leverage to demand a better deal
If the company is going to screw you over like that, may as well make them pay for it.
Since this is getting a lot of reblogs, here’s a federal source that can help you determine if you’re illegally classified as a contractor:
You can also file a form with the IRS to force the company to correct your classification (assuming you meet the criteria), without necessarily having to sue:
Keep in mind that this is just federal. Most states also prohibit missclassification as an independent contractor; and even if states have more lenient rules, companies still have to comply with this federal law. The rules have largely been bipartisan and existed for decades, so they’re common.
States also have an interest in having regulations about missclassification: it’s a significant loss of tax revenue. Your self employment tax does not fully equal what a company would have paid for you in payroll taxes.
A lawyer can help point you in the right direction if a company is currently missclassifying you.















