in-the-right - Tumblr blog

[in-the-right]

... I think I just had an aneurysm actually??

Masterpost of gender-neutral language used for women but not men

Some say that gender-neutral language is not sexist, nor does it erase women. Here are some examples that prove otherwise, revealing the bias for women, and not men, to surrender linguistic boundaries.

(I’ve been collecting examples since I made this post. Thanks to all who submitted! I will keep adding on.)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

[in-the-right]

Hello, I am am sonographer aka ultrasound tech, registered in four different modalities including OBGYN, who scans pregnant women regularly. A 12 week old fetus has ALL of its organs fully formed. Here are pictures of its brain and heart.

So since you have less of a brain than a 12 week old fetus, does that mean we should be allowed to kill you?

Because parental responsibility exists.

[in-the-right]

delete your blog

Love you, too, precious

[in-the-right]

… What in the actual Fuck are you talking about

the kids aren’t alright

[in-the-right]

This just in—TSA checkpoints are not designed for comfort or enjoyment! They are, in fact, designed for safety. Your complaining that some people have different things which means different inconveniences is like, so deep and stuff, but how about you provide a workable alternative. Then I might not roll my eyes out of my skull.

Today I had to get a private patdown by two TSA agents because my incontinence pad set off their screening devices

[in-the-right]

Hey guys? Did none of you do basic math? Spreading 44 billion dollars amongst 8 billion people gets each person $5.50. Fourth grade.

[in-the-right]

[in-the-right]

Okay, I was enjoying this thread, but my eyes just rolled SO hard. Stop trying to control how people reblog your threads or how people choose to debate leftists; it’s SO cringe.

[in-the-right]

It’s really weird how everybody on tumblr who knew and professed five seconds ago that Twitter was the ultimate cesspool immediately forgets that when Elon Musk changes a single thing about it.

Elon Musk really said: Destroy Twitter any% speedrun [WR]

[in-the-right]

At this point, the only thing convincing people the slippery slope isn’t a thing is the fact that these people have the memory of a goldfish.

[in-the-right]

Sybil’s case even turned out to be fraud, and y’all expect me to believe even half of people claiming to have DID actually have it? Most claims of DID are because nobody took kinning seriously enough for them, so now they’re trying to shove forced acceptance down people’s throats. Especially on Discord, there are entire servers of mostly people claiming to have DID (but servers of unrelated topics, not specifically for DID) to the point that the servers have made rules and info posts about “fictives” (identities that are “real” versions of fictional characters) and “factives” (identities that are “real” other iterations of famous people) and banning anyone who thinks critically about this at all. In fact, most of these people now seem to prefer LARPing as their favorite people instead of their OCs; how strange. /s And there is no talk about any of these personalities seeking integration and recovery from their trauma response; in fact, the new dogma is that these are all 100% separate people in one body (sound kinda familiar?).

Back in the days of actually valuing reality and improving mental health, it was recommended that others not play along with a mentally ill person’s delusions, just like how people are not supposed to ask about or try to “interact” with a hallucinating person’s hallucinations. It’s cruel, and further confusing them about reality is very harmful. But no, ever since we have to pretend women are men and vice versa and everything in between, common sense regarding mental health has been turned directly on its head. Now instead of getting a disturbed man who believes he’s the queen of England mental help, he gets a job at Starbucks with a pin that says “queen/queenself” pronouns, and you get kicked out of you don’t toe the line.

(But surely confusing a good portion of the population regarding what is reality and what should be accepted as “truth” wouldn’t be a political ploy to be able to get away with authoritarianism and corruption, right?)

I don’t trust half you bitches who claim to have DID btw.

[in-the-right]

Hey guys, if you don’t know how to remove a baby from the womb without cutting it up or intentionally poisoning it, you probably shouldn’t be an obstetrician.

Leilah Zahedi-Spung, a high-risk obstetrician in Chattanooga, Tenn., recently saw a pregnant patient with rising blood pressure who the doctor believed could be facing a serious health emergency. The patient was in her second trimester of pregnancy and her unborn baby had been diagnosed with genetic abnormalities that meant the child wasn’t expected to survive. Dr. Zahedi-Spung feared the mother was at risk of a severe form of preeclampsia that can cause seizures and ultimately death. The doctor said she thought the patient needed an abortion, but Tennessee has a total ban on the procedure. The state law, in effect since late August, allows doctors to argue the procedure was necessary to save the life of the patient, but Dr. Zahedi-Spung said she wasn’t confident the woman’s condition was dire enough to meet that standard and feared that being charged with a crime could upend her life for years, even if she eventually was vindicated. She decided to send the woman on a roughly six-hour ambulance ride to end her pregnancy in North Carolina, where she arrived with dangerously high blood pressure and signs of kidney failure, the doctor said. “She kept asking if she was going to die,” Dr. Zahedi-Spung said. “I kept saying, ‘I’m trying, I’m trying, we’re going to make it happen. We just need to get you to the right place where you can be taken care of.’” When she saw the patient a couple of weeks later, alive, the doctor said she felt a wave of relief.

For all forced birthers, may you have pregnancy complications, and may you be trapped in Tennessee.

The only defenses I've seen about no-exception bans are either that people should just die instead of having a life-saving abortion or that prosecuters won't actually prosecute. If you subscribe to the first, you're a Hitler wannabe. If the latter....what the fuck are you on!?!

No one would buy that for any law. "We don't want to prosecute doctors! We just made it illegal for them to save pregnant people's lives, but we won't actually uphold that law."

Bullshit. So may each and every one of you be trapped in Tennessee, pregnant with complications.

You can clutch your pearls and whisper about how horrible it is I wish this on you, but you forced it on everyone in Tennessee. Women, transmen, intersex, agender, etc. Even children! So why do you believe you have the right not to have it happen to you?

[in-the-right]

[in-the-right]

The rest is in the link. I post it because “The Conversation” poses itself as a cathedral mouthpiece. It’s a cloister of approved opinion and claims to be a non-profit platform where the self-anointed “experts” make their pronouncements from on high. Read it to digest the lack of self-awareness on display.

They loudly dismiss criticism of alterations made to Tolkien’s universe as invalid and political while drenching every change that’s been made by rings of power in blatant politics and ideology. This makes their defense of the show arbitrary and based solely on the ideological vehicle they admit the show is.

I’ve said for a long time the best way to understand the Rings of Power is as a piece of political kitsch.

It’s a billion dollar retcon and an ideological correction made by de facto corporate apparatchiks. As they make plainly obvious in this column and Q&A, they’re debasing a work of art that resonates and touches people with the human truths and values of a bygone world that they seek to slander and supplant.

[in-the-right]

Seriously, every single time I’m offloading groceries into my car, I recall that fucking shopping cart 4chan post, and every time I go out of my way to put the shopping cart back.

It’s like, “yes, I am not a savage animal, I can do this” and it’s been like this for over a year.

God damn.

[in-the-right]

[in-the-right]

You guys don't have to be calm or reasonable because the people who are in control of our society already agree with you.

Yeah I wonder why that is? Modern society agreeing that the potentially of a 8 week old fetus shouldn’t legally trump over a woman’s choice & autonomy , regardless of individual thoughts about morality

That isn’t outrageous. That’s logical.

If “human life activists “ actually want to make a change and reduce abortions, the most logical way to go about it is to focus on the root issues of it and not try to criminalize something that you simply don’t agree with because it goes against your personal morals. You’re not going to achieve the positive end results you seek even if you would’ve managed to fully criminalize it. Women will get simply seek more back alley abortions & put themselves more in danger, you keep denying the reality of what leads so many women to abortion in the first place.

This is why the pro life movement hasn’t been nearly as successful as it “should” be giving how many years of “activism” and seeking to fully criminalize abortion its had. The majority don’t sympathize with pro lifers because you don’t care about women and what they have to say about their own health, bodies, financial struggles ect. Adoption is not a solution to pregnancy. These “choices” pro lifers give out aren’t choices, they are another problem. How are you going to sit here and actively try to criminalize something you claim is killing unborn children to for your solution to be to throw more into an overflowing abusive system? How is that any more moral to you? You’re convincing yourself that anything is better than death when that’s something you’ve decided yourself because you can’t bother actually trying to fix a broken system that makes these children miserable & leads them into lives full of addiction and abuse. Not to mention that historically, abortion bans have not worked like they were intended to. You sound ingenious because if you truly cared about children, you would be focusing your full attention where it actually matters and would make a difference. Shaming women, and harassing them outside abortion clinics and ranting about it online is doing absolutely nothing.

"Modern society agreeing that the potentially of a 8 week old fetus shouldn’t legally trump over a woman’s choice & autonomy , regardless of individual thoughts about morality

That isn’t outrageous. That’s logical."

It's completely outrageous because that's advocating for murdering a baby. Not a potential baby. An existing human baby. When you use the word "potential" in regards to the fetus, that just comes off as scientifically illiterate. There's no debate in science about whether or not the unborn are human beings so when you say stuff like that, you're just showing you don't know the science. And advocating to kill a baby is never logical. And it's messed up that you think it is.

"If “human life activists “ actually want to make a change and reduce abortions, the most logical way to go about it is to focus on the root issues of it and not try to criminalize something that you simply don’t agree with because it goes against your personal morals."

I don't think someone who doesn't even know the basic biology of fetal development is really qualified to be telling human rights activists what the logical thing to do is.

Are you against rape? Because if you really were and wanted to make a change, the most logical way to go about it is to focus on the root of the issue and try not to criminalize something that you simply don't agree with because it goes against your personal morals.

"Women will get simply seek more back alley abortions & put themselves more in danger, you keep denying the reality of what leads so many women to abortion in the first place."

Back alley abortions were performed by medical professionals. They were called back alley abortions because the client seeking the abortion would enter through the back door, which was usually facing an alleyway, instead of the front.

But people continuing to do something is not an argument for making that thing illegal. Especially if that thing is killing someone else.

And I have never once denied the reality of what leads women to get abortions in the first place. It's possible to focus both on banning abortion and focusing on the issues that lead women to get abortions and pro-lifers do both which pro-choicers would know if you guys got out of your echo chamber every once in a while.

"The majority don’t sympathize with pro lifers because you don’t care about women and what they have to say about their own health, bodies, financial struggles ect."

That's just downright false. Pro-lifers do more to help women than pro-choicers do.

"Adoption is not a solution to pregnancy."

Adoption is an alternative to killing a baby you don't want.

"These “choices” pro lifers give out aren’t choices, they are another problem."

This is the problem with pro-choice ideology. The only choice you advocate for is abortion. No other choice is good enough or not a real choice. If it's not abortion then it's just another problem.

How can you value the life of the baby so little that any option that allows the baby to live is not ok and just another problem? It sounds like you want that baby to die.

The reality, whether or not you choose to accept it, is that there are other choices. You just don't like them because they don't end with a dead baby.

"How are you going to sit here and actively try to criminalize something you claim is killing unborn children to for your solution to be to throw more into an overflowing abusive system? How is that any more moral to you?"

Because murder is immoral. Not every baby whose mother chooses life after considering abortion is going to end up in the system. And how can you possibly have the audacity to use children in foster care to advocate for murdering innocent babies? How disgusting that you value children in the foster system so little that you would make the argument they are better off dead. If the overflowing abusive system is the problem for you, why don't we just kill all the kids currently in it? That would make more sense.

But like, how come when you see a problem, your solution is not to fix a broken system, but to kill the children? Why not eliminate the suffering instead of the sufferer?

How is murdering a child to save them from potential abuse moral?

"You’re convincing yourself that anything is better than death when that’s something you’ve decided yourself because you can’t bother actually trying to fix a broken system that makes these children miserable & leads them into lives full of addiction and abuse."

Well guess what? You don't get to decide for someone else whether or not death is better for them. I think life is better than death and you may disagree but who are you to make that decision for another person? The problem here is this person already exists and is alive. Me thinking life is better than death doesn't do anything to this person except not kill them. Yours allows people to end the life of someone if they decide that person's life isn't worth living. That's not a choice you get to make for someone else.

"if you truly cared about children, you would be focusing your full attention where it actually matters and would make a difference."

A person, such as yourself, who defends and advocates for the brutal murder of innocent babies is the least qualified person on planet Earth to tell someone trying to save the lives of the babies you want dead how to "truly" care about children.

The nerve you have to send a long ass message on why you think murdering babies needs to be a thing and then try to lecture me on how to care about children is really something else.

Saving the lives of babies actually matters. Even if you don't care about them.