lockerandom - Tumblr blog

[lockerandom]

My biggest pet peeve about sustainability discourse is that, yeah, a handful of companies are fucking us all over, and yeah, we need fundamental change coming from the government. But also you need to understand that you can't have both things:

You can't have zero single use plastic and only sustainable materials and expect to be able to afford brand new clothes every month.

You can't have an increase in workers rights protections and expect to still get things you order online delivered to your house in a couple of days.

You can't have meat production reduced to the point where it's not environmental destructive and expect to be eating meat more than a couple times a week at most.

We NEED big scale change but that WILL significantly affect your lifestyle. You need to stop living in a fantasy world where fast fashion prices or eating animal products daily can ever coexist with sustainability.

[lockerandom]

i love fur, i love leather, i love wool, i love long lasting materials without plastic in them that will decompose and go back into the ecosystem after serving me well for several decades.

[lockerandom]

some of the top comments on a hank green reel about climate change.

this attitude is honestly terrifying and also infuriating to me. Yes, billionaires are the main polluters of this planet, far disproportionate to their number.

but the fact that to so many (us-american) leftists, "tax the rich" and "expropriate billionaires" has turned into people living in some of the richest countries on the planet convincing themselves that their consumption and living habits bear no responsibility in climate change makes me feel sick

believing in that to the point of saying CARS are not harmful for the planet? have these people lost their fucking minds? and of course, its only ever other countries which are to blame....

its exactly these takes that you encounter in anti-vegan rethoric as well. as soon as anyone demands a change of these people, they bend over backwards and use leftist internet lingo to say that asking them to change is akin to being a facist or whatever

[lockerandom]

Something I've been thinking about in regards to this. What are we going to do as AI starts taking jobs? Are we going to see more and more people dependent on a partner? What does someone do when they are layed off because a computer can do their job better? And I mean both men and women. We thought the creative jobs would be the last to go but they ended up being the first.

We need to fight for UBI now.

the funniest thing about the tiktok tradwife craze is people learning financial abuse exists but like, as a hypothetical. "wait what if the relationship doesn't work out and you have nothing of your own and nowhere to go?" congratulations you figured out a common reason people remain in abusive relationships and why it's important to maintain some level of financial independence

[lockerandom]

It took me awhile to figure out what a tradwife was because I thought, isn't that just a SAHM? But tradwife seems to be more extreme and they don't wear pants? I've also suspected that some of those tradwife influencers are just fetish influencers. I can tell what audience they a re trying to attract. But you also get genuine ones.

For girls watching those influencers and want to take on the tradwife lifestyle, they need to realize that those influencers do have an income and are not completely reliant on their husbands. Its like a lot of those fundie women who tell women that their husband should be the breadwinner but then they are clearly making money through youtube or instagram. It likes behind all those housewife characters from 1950s TV was a woman making a lot of money as an actress.

Otherwise, to really make being a SAHM work, you need to come from money. They women where I lived, it was like they never left college, but now they don't have class. They were going to yoga, out for lunch, mommy and me classes, swimming, it was fascinating to watch. It was almost always the well off girls from high school who were leading these lives.

Anna, I used to want her to divorce Josh and get her kids away from him. But now that he's in jail I think she's better off just living in the warehouse. She's got seven kids. In that situation that's the best place for her, assuming there is not another predator living near by and has access to the kids.

The US system is so fucked up. There's no safety net and most people are one accident away from being broke and homeless. Healthcare is tied to employment and you need to work full time to get those benefits. I wish I could work only twenty hours. I'm neurodivergent and COVID fucked me up. But I need the healthcare full time gives me. I think parents in general would be much happier with a twenty hour work week. Then they can easy alternate who is watching the kids with out both being exhausted after an eight hour work day. And all of us could use more free time.

I wish I could write more but... work.

I think the most frustrating thing, period, is that gaps in resumes need to be explained.

Have people tried to explain the rationale to me? Yes.

Do I still get incredibly annoyed in interviews when I have to explain that a relative needed full-time care, and I was the person in the best position to do it (and thankfully we could afford for me to spend my time that way)? Yes.

Financially depending on another person means that if *anything* happens to them, you, and the rest of the people depending on them, are at risk. The most frustrating thing about that though is if you need to work because of misfortune, you can be penalized again in the form of a difficult time finding work.

(The job hunt is not going well and I needed a mini rant)

Oh I agree with that point independent of like, the bigger argument. I think it's stupid that our work culture doesn't take into account that not everyone can or will spend their entire adult life employed with no breaks, it's just ignoring reality. Especially in the case of caring for a sick loved one, like very few people who become caregivers in that way anticipate that or work that into their "5 year plan".

And that goes for anyone who has a work history gap, stay at home moms included. It's only included in the trad wife argument because it realistically is something that could be an obstacle if you have to get a job after a decade or more of not being employed, and it's just one more thing that could make financial independence for those moms/wives difficult. And like a certain wife was bragging about in the notes of that reblog, a lot of women in that situation don't have any previous work history or higher education, which adds another layer of difficulty.

But even if our work culture sucked less and gaps weren't an issue, there would still be a ton of things stacked against a mom who is trying to leave a situation where she is completely financially dependent, with no agreements or safety nets put in place. In some places, not having a job or work history can be used against them in custody battles. Also trads love to argue the child support thing, but that system is so imperfect.... I know of a person who was ordered to pay $4 (yes you read right) a week for each of their 2 kids, so $32 dollars a month for *both* kids (and they don't even pay that). So to say that a dad would absolutely have to pay a fair amount in a divorce situation is completely untrue.

Sorry I went on a bit of a tangent lol but I agree with you, the work gap thing is just used in that kind of argument bc it's a real possible obstacle for women in that situation.

[lockerandom]

This is where people that have a loving and supportive family have a huge advantage. Especially when they have a parent that says "if things don't work out, come home." I'm thinking of a friend who was in an accident, ended up disabled and was out of the workforce for five years. His parents had him move in with them and later they helped him get another job. I don't know what someone who didn't have a supportive family would do in that situation.

Really gaps in resume should not hinder someone from finding a job. Someone who went to jail for twenty years for possessing weed should not have a next to impossible time finding a job. Not only do you have the work gap, but also prison time.

I do know a lot of women who were SAHMs who either became Pharmacy technicians or work in care giving fields after all their kids are in school. Or some do doordash or instacart. A lot of people that served prison time were also doing delivery service jobs before they started to require background checks.

Of course you also have those Tradwives that are making money with their instagram accounts and its targeted at a certain group of men. Or they are trust fund kids. (Nearly every SAHM where I live is a trust fund kid I wouldn't call them trad wives and I've never seen a legit tradwife in person.) But many of their followers do not realize that they have those safety nets. I at least hope those girls have supportive families that will be willing to help out if things go south in their marriage.

Anna Duggar's case is unique because she still gets to live in a warehouse. Yeah it sounds like that would suck but she and her kids have a roof over their heads and now Josh is gone (She's incredibly stupid in that she still wants to be with him)

I think the most frustrating thing, period, is that gaps in resumes need to be explained.

Have people tried to explain the rationale to me? Yes.

Do I still get incredibly annoyed in interviews when I have to explain that a relative needed full-time care, and I was the person in the best position to do it (and thankfully we could afford for me to spend my time that way)? Yes.

Financially depending on another person means that if *anything* happens to them, you, and the rest of the people depending on them, are at risk. The most frustrating thing about that though is if you need to work because of misfortune, you can be penalized again in the form of a difficult time finding work.

(The job hunt is not going well and I needed a mini rant)

Oh I agree with that point independent of like, the bigger argument. I think it's stupid that our work culture doesn't take into account that not everyone can or will spend their entire adult life employed with no breaks, it's just ignoring reality. Especially in the case of caring for a sick loved one, like very few people who become caregivers in that way anticipate that or work that into their "5 year plan".

And that goes for anyone who has a work history gap, stay at home moms included. It's only included in the trad wife argument because it realistically is something that could be an obstacle if you have to get a job after a decade or more of not being employed, and it's just one more thing that could make financial independence for those moms/wives difficult. And like a certain wife was bragging about in the notes of that reblog, a lot of women in that situation don't have any previous work history or higher education, which adds another layer of difficulty.

But even if our work culture sucked less and gaps weren't an issue, there would still be a ton of things stacked against a mom who is trying to leave a situation where she is completely financially dependent, with no agreements or safety nets put in place. In some places, not having a job or work history can be used against them in custody battles. Also trads love to argue the child support thing, but that system is so imperfect.... I know of a person who was ordered to pay $4 (yes you read right) a week for each of their 2 kids, so $32 dollars a month for *both* kids (and they don't even pay that). So to say that a dad would absolutely have to pay a fair amount in a divorce situation is completely untrue.

Sorry I went on a bit of a tangent lol but I agree with you, the work gap thing is just used in that kind of argument bc it's a real possible obstacle for women in that situation.

[lockerandom]

god i hope the cpsc takes the shot. i think this would dramatically change their entire business model. amazon makes so much money by selling defective or mislabeled or just plain dangerous products and then faces little liability because this stuff is actually being sold by random third-party sellers that don't get vetted at all and can be hard to prosecute because they're in china or wherever. this is a big part of what makes amazon so powerful and it would be good for everyone if they were forced to bear more responsibility for the damages caused by the crap available on their website

[lockerandom]

So fucking tired of the gods damned temu ads being fucking everywhere. I’m so fucking sick of this bullshit system temu and shein have built themselves on of fucking, palatable exploitation where westerns are fine with it because “but it’s so cheap and it gets here so fast” at the fucking cost of people working for the equivalent of pennies an hour

[lockerandom]

Anyone else sick of ppl who align themselves with the same views as you generally and are good ppl but then are just like actually I don’t give a single fuck about climate change and I’m totally cool with my money going towards [comically evil monopolistic unethical company] because convenience/cheaper (even though you make twice my wages/live off of daddy’s cash). Like this situation happens to me way too often. Why don’t you care if you apparently care so much I don’t fucking get it. Sorry I’m making like weekly posts about this now but it actually makes no sense to me. You can’t demand change but also be indifferent or even in opposition to making any yourself that is not how it works actually.

[lockerandom]

psa: that cute frog tea set and the shark cat plushie and the astronomy ring and a bunch of other stuff you might see links to buy on Tumblr dot com?

make sure you check AliExpress before you pay $50 to a dropshipper for something like that. all I'm gonna say

[lockerandom]

🌻🌿

[lockerandom]

the most valid ‘consumer action’ you can do is to just buy less shit rather than tearing your hair out finding the most ethical products and companies but still maintaining the same consumption level. anyone with an interest in maintaining an economy based on profits is not going to encourage you to buy less of anything, no matter how sustainable and plant based and so on. rather than thinking overconsumption can be good as long as you find the right stuff to buy, challenge the consumer mindset.

[lockerandom]

"Omg, I love these! They go up to size 6X AND they have pockets?! Wow!! But do you have anything longer?"

Sure do, no problem!!

"YES these are great!!! But what about.. longer?"

I gotcha!! Comin' right up!

"Now that's what I'm talkin' about! But... how about if I'm feeling like it's the kinda day where I need my clothing to be bifurcated???"

Never fear, joggers are here!

*wild cheering*

/scene

🖤witchvamp.com🖤

[lockerandom]

[lockerandom]

So...why does it seem like your fast fashion clothes from 10+ years ago are so much better than they are now? I wrote about why for Vox:

There's so much I wanted to fit in here, but couldn't. Mainly, my point here is that things like climate change, covid, and the speed of consumerism (aka haul buys and/or replacing something that could be repaired) has incentivized companies to cut corners. The result is just more and more and more stuff — but at the cost of quality.

[lockerandom]

So...why does it seem like your fast fashion clothes from 10+ years ago are so much better than they are now? I wrote about why for Vox:

There's so much I wanted to fit in here, but couldn't. Mainly, my point here is that things like climate change, covid, and the speed of consumerism (aka haul buys and/or replacing something that could be repaired) has incentivized companies to cut corners. The result is just more and more and more stuff — but at the cost of quality.

[lockerandom]

I wrote about why the classism argument is a failed one when it comes to buying tons of fast fashion

Okay, I know a lot of you are going to be REALLY ANGRY at this. And that's fine. But let's talk about affordability of cheap clothes. Whenever activists and experts tend to critique the fashion industry, people who can afford to buy better (or buy less!) get caught up behind the argument of affordability. But poor people aren't the ones buy $300 hauls to parade around on social media. When folks are talking about buying better or buying less, we're talking to the people who have the ability of choice. It's not normal to buy several items of clothing a month, and clothing shouldn't be this cheap. (And what I mean by cheap is like your $1.91 shirts on Shein.) If you really care about poor people, think about the 60 million garment workers globally — the majority of whom make poverty wages and work in terrible conditions. Overconsumption has consequences for them and for our planet, as well. I'm not saying it's our job to fix fast fashion. Governments need to create better laws, and brands shouldn't wait for regulations to do the right thing. In the meantime, we don't need to continue putting our dollars behind the worst of the worst.