#Onus of Proof

[cryptidafter]

gotta love how we have six people proof something (not once but TWICE) only for mistakes to be missed and the person complaining is the one who should've been going over everything with a fine-tooth comb...

[ghelgheli]

Historians are rarely challenged just for applying words like ‘woman’ and ‘man’ to the past; it would not inevitably cause a backlash to say that a historical figure wanted power, or grieved, or felt anger. A trans historian, though, is caught in the double-bind of the DSM-5. Our experiences and our desires are quite literally mad. We do not have the social license to see ourselves fractured and reflected in historical figures; we are standing in the wrong place to write. Put simply, if you foreclose trans readings, you foreclose trans writing. When we reflect on the similarities between our lives and those of historical figures, we are accused of spreading our social contagion to the dead. To read our own anamorphoses in a text, to communicate that to a cis academic establishment who have rendered our unqualified subjectivities unimaginable, we are forced to accuse historical figures of transness. And then, of course, we are chastised for pathologising them. For a trans historian, it is not viable to simply universalise our experiences of gender. In order to relate to historical figures’ gendered experiences in our writing in a way that is legible to cis readers, we have to assert that those figures were trans. There is a gap to be bridged, and the onus to bridge it falls on us… Transmisogyny and anti-effeminacy were and are integral to the structure of patriarchy and therefore to cisness (or vice-versa). In ‘Monster Culture (Seven Theses)’, Jeffrey Jerome Cohen proposed a methodology for reading cultures: ‘from the monsters they engender’. In concluding this sketch of Byzantine cisness, I would like to attempt to apply this method. To monster a group or an individual is a violent act, and through examining the way transfemininity was monstered in Byzantium, we can begin to understand the shape of the violent regulation of gendered possibilities that constituted Byzantine cisness… Synesius [of Cyrene] did not simply compare the image of the elegantly coiffed effeminate with the shiny dome of the soldier’s helmet; he went one step further, proclaiming that pretty hair was the give-away for hidden effeminacy. He rails against ‘effeminate wretches’ who ‘make a cult of their hair’, who he suggests engage in sex work not out of economic necessity but as an act of sex and gender exhibitionism, to ‘display fully the effeminacy of their character’. Then, he goes on to say:

And whoever is secretly perverted, even if he should swear the contrary in the marketplace, and should present no other proof of being an acolyte of Cotys save only in a great care of his hair, anointing it and arranging it in ringlets, he might well be denounced to all as one who has celebrated orgies to the Chian goddess and the Ithyphalli.

The implication is clear: long, well kempt, perfumed and curled hair is not just hair, it is a signifier, one that signals total abnegation of manhood, and therefore of cisness. This demonstrates one of the mechanisms by which cisness was maintained and enforced in the Byzantine world. Relatively minor embodied gender transgressions, like too-long or too-pretty hair, could be linked to transfemininity and to sexual receptivity, the two farthest points from patriarchal manhood. That is not to say that this prevented people from committing such gender transgressions; rather that it made them risky, a weapon that could be used against you by anyone who wanted to do you harm. The other thing demonstrated by Synesius’ invective is the relationship between effeminacy, unmasculine vanity and presumed sexual receptivity. It would be tempting, based on the relationship Synesius draws between long beautiful hair and receptive anal sex, to suggest that the animating force of this antipathy is, if not homophobia, a narrower pre-modern equivalent. There is, however, a fantastically complicating detail in Synesius’ remark on the reasons such ‘effeminates’ engage in sex work: being sexually available is presented as an instrumental, rather than terminal value. In Synesius’ imagination, sex work is the means, but social recognition of the feminine gender of the sex worker is the end: to ‘display fully the effeminacy of their character’. The monster Synesius invokes to shore-up his own gender position, to guard his own cisness and his access to hegemonic masculinity, is an unambiguously transmisogynist fantasy. It is here that Byzantine cisness most sharply converges with twenty-first-century cisness.

‘Selective Historians’: The Construction of Cisness in Byzantine and Byzantinist Texts, Ilya Maude [DOI]

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

*pssst*

Pass it on, you don't need to have trauma to be allowed to engage in super taboo kink scenes or fiction.

The burden and onus of proof that something is the direct cause of harm is dependant on the person who believes that it is harmful.

Kink is a healthy expression of sexuality, and fiction is one of the safest ways to indulge in kink. Have fun, drink water and keep it peachy!

[cryptotheism]

here this explains it better than my last anon https://princessnijireiki.tumblr.com/post/685619095309303808/what-happened-w-the-staff-wrt-scortched-earth

Okay let's break this down this posts and its claims. I'm gonna preface this by saying that I'm only going off what this post is providing, and interpreting it personally. None of this is meant to be some sort of objective fact.

1) being a fan of Harry Potter does not make someone a TERF.

2) Ship art does not make someone a TERF. This is irrelevant information. Enjoying an anime, even a questionable one, does not make someone a TERF.

3) Accusations of ship art with preschoolers is a HUGE accusation, backed up with no links, no evidence. The onus of proof is on the accuser, and I think it's reasonable for me to not go scouring this staff members blog to confirm or deny a single users unsupported claims of problematic ship art that has nothing to do with the core accusation of terfdom.

1) entirely secondhand hearsay. One person claiming to see something is not evidence. Random people can claim whatever they want.

2) who fucking cares if staff engages in fandom circles. That's not relevant to any of the accusations.

Again. Nothing to do with terfdom. So far this entire argument hinges on the claim that this staff member liking Harry Potter is conclusive proof that they're a TERF, which it is not. Is liking Harry Potter cringe? Yes absolutely. Does it mean you're a TERF? No.

Tumblr has a small moderation team. As someone who has personally had my blog banned and then subsequently gone through the appeals process, it is clearly an imperfect system that begets slow responses and lackluster mass action. There are reasonable reasons that staff response on even infamous blogs could be lackluster, especially when compared to direct and personal accusations of interacting with pedophilic material.

As a transfem person who has personally been the target of bad-faith pedophilia accusations from actual neo-nazis in the past. I cannot stress how deeply and powerfully irresponsible it is to make an accusation like this without thorough sourcing.

TERFs are banned all the time. Y'all just don't keep up with TERF circles because you're reasonable people. The idea that staff doesn't ban TERFs is untrue.

The only actual data point this entire post has is "a staff member was possibly into Harry Potter, and then reacted dramatically when people implied they were a pedophile." And that is FAR from conclusive proof that someone is a TERF.

I am saying this as a transfem person who has actively been targeted by TERFs, this is conspiracy thought, and you're not actually helping trans people by harassing a staff member with unsourced claims about their potentially cringeworthy media choices. Because let me be crystal fucking clear here: yes liking Harry Potter is cringe. If I could turn every TERF on the planet into a non-terf who was overly-attatched to Harry Potter, I would do so in a fucking second. The two things are not comparable.

[ficsforgaza]

˗ˏˋ HOW TO PARTICIPATE ˎˊ˗

There are two options: “Sponsor a WIP” and Requests

OPTION 1: “SPONSOR A WIP”

↳ For writers:

You will make a post listing the current WIPs or ideas you are working on/would be willing to work on as a gift for proof of donation. We will link to your post on a masterlist of writers who are participating. People who wish to donate can donate money to a fundraiser for Gaza as a way to advance your WIP. For example, someone can donate $5 and show you proof, as a response you write 500 more words towards the WIP that they are interested in. (This rate is an example. You can set another rate if you want to. Please include that in your post!).

The onus of updating word counts/proof will be on the writer. For example: if your fic’s expected word count is 2000 words, and you’ve written 500 so far as donations, just leave a word count on your wip page like, “Currently 500 words. Expected WC 2000.”

Once you have completed any fics that you wanted to use for this, you can let us know, and we will remove you from the list of active participants.

↳ For readers:

You will go to a writer’s WIP list, and choose a WIP that sounds intresting to you. You then make a donation to a VETTED fundraiser for Gaza. Take a screenshot of your donation. then, send the screenshot to the writer along with your WIP of choice.

OPTION 2: REQUESTS

↳ For writers:

If you are open to taking requests or prompts , please let us know and make a post listing the types of requests or prompts you will be able to take. Also please include the fandoms you are willing to write for and any pertinent rules for your requests. We will link your post onto a post with a list of writers who are open to requests. A donor will send you a request/prompt which you can fulfill as long as you are comfortable with their request. You can discuss privately if more details are required, but at the end of the day, perform the request/prompt as a gift for donations to a VETTED fundraiser.

↳ For readers:

The writer will be open to requests or prompts, depending on their preference. Please work with the writer directly to make a request and send proof of a donation in order to receive your gifted fic.

NOTES

↳ For writers:

We set a $1 donation per 100 words rate as an example and as a low barrier to entry. You can set your own criteria as you see fit.

This blog is set up more so to be a repository for which writers are open to "sponsors"/requests. We will not accept your requests directly, nor will we ask writers for fic updates. Once the fic is completed, if you tag this blog, we will see it and reblog it.

Please update us on how much money you have raised! We’ve made a form which you can use, here’s the link. We’d like to display how much money this collaboration has raised together so we can all see the results of everyone’s work :)

Once you post a fic on tumblr, if you could tag this blog or insert some blurb about donating to Gaza, that would be appreciated! If you post your fic on ao3 however, do not mention any type of fundraiser at all to avoid any TOS issue.

↳ For readers:

Please abide by each writer’s individual rules and DNI criteria as well as the criteria for requests if they are accepting requests.

Please only donate to vetted fundraisers; we want to be sure your donation is reaching people in need and not scammers. If possible, along with your screenshot, send a link to the gofundme so that the writer can easily locate which fundraiser you donated to.

When you send your screenshot, please make an effort to redact personal information!

BE KIND. Writing is a hobby. Please do not rush anyone! Writers write at their own pace. This is just meant for the community to do something positive for the genocide we are witnessing! So we ask that everyone be kind when making requests and reading people’s works.

[libraford]

I am trying not to put the onus of my mistakes on others.

-"There is a mistake on our printed books that was not on the proof."

-"Lee needs to confirm that it was not on the proof."

Me: "it was not on the proof. There was post-proof work done and I neglected to send a new proof." Because when I did the post-proof work, she told me to go ahead and submit it. But I'm not saying this now. Because people don't like my tone. Instead, I am saying: "sorry."

First time ever being in that situation.

She is going to be pissed. This is a thousand dollar mistake. Which isn't much, but people will scream at you over 3 cents.

[writing-reference-redux]

I felt like sharing my collection of Latin phrases that may make good fanfic or fanart titles or inspiration. Some of the translations may be off, so you might want to double-check them before use. Also, I used capitalization liberally so you might also want to check where capitalization is actually indicated.

Ab Intra (From Within)

Acta Est Fabula (The play has been performed)

Acta Sancti ___ (The Deeds of Saint ___)

Ad Undas (to the waves / to hell)

Advocatus Diaboli (Devil's advocate)

Aegri Somnia (a sick man's dreams / troubled dreams)

Alea Iacta Est (the die has been cast / point of no return)

Apologia Pro Vita Sua (defense of one's life)

Caetera Desunt (the rest is missing)

Cedere Nescio (I know not how to yield)

Damnatio Memoriae (damnation of memory / denying someone ever lived)

De Nobis Fabula Narratur (their story is our story)

Decessit Vita Patris (died before their father)

Diem Perdidi (I have lost the day)

Dies Tenebrosa Sicut Nox (a day as dark as night)

Dolor Hic Tibi Proderit Olim (some day this pain will be useful to you)

Dulce Est Desipere In Loco (It is sweet on occasion to play the fool)

Dum Vivimus, Vivamus (while we live, let us live)

Dux Bellorum (war leader)

Ex Umbra In Solem (from the shadow into the light)

Festina Lente (hurry slowly)

Fortis Cadere, Cedere Non Potest (the brave may fall, but can not yield)

Fui Quod Es, Eris Quod Sum (I once was what you are, you will be what I am)

Graviora Manent (heavier things remain / the worst is yet to come)

Haec Olim Meminisse Iuvabit (one day, this will be pleasing to remember)

Hic Mortui Vivunt (here the dead speak)

Hinc Illae Lacrimae (hence those tears)

Hodie Mihi, Cras Tibi (Today it's me, tomorrow it will be you - of death)

Iacate Et Scire (Be still and know)

In Ictu Oculi (in the blink of an eye)

In Somnis Veritas (in dreams there is truth)

Inter Spem Et Metum (between hope and fear)

Lapsus Memoriae (slip of memory)

Luctor, Non Mergor (I struggle, but am not overwhelmed)

Lux Ex Tenebris (light from darkness)

Media Vita In Morte Sumus (In the midst of our lives we die)

Memento Mori (remember that you will die)

Memento Vivere (remember to live)

Morior Invictus (I die unvanquished / death before defeat)

Mundus Senescit (the world grows old)

Nemini Parco (I spare no one - death)

Nitimur In Vetitum (we strive for the forbidden)

Non Ducor, Duco (I am not led; I lead)

Non Omnis Moriar (I shall not all die / part of me will survive beyond death)

Nunc Scio Quid Sit Amor (now I know what love is)

Oderint Dum Metuant (let them hate, so long as they fear)

Omnia Mutantur (everything changes)

Onus Probandi (burden of proof)

Opera Posthuma (posthumous works)

Ophidia In Herba (a snake in the grass)

Pax Aeterna (eternal peace - a common epitaph)

Primum Non Nocere (first do no harm)

Pulvis Et Umbra Sumus (we are dust and shadow)

Quis Leget Haec? (who will read this?)

Quod Periit, Periit (what Is gone is gone)

Res, Non Verba (deeds, not words)

Respice Finem (consider the end)

Scientia Et Sapientia (knowledge and wisdom)

Seculo Seculorum (forever and ever)

Sed Terrae Graviora Manent (but on earth, worse things await)

Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum (if you want peace, prepare for war)

Sic Infit (so it begins)

Sic Vita Est (such is life)

Silentium Est Aureum (silence is golden)

Sine Nomine (without a name / author unknown)

Sola Dosis Facit Venemum (the dose makes the poison)

Solvitur Ambulando (it is solved by walking / simple tests find solutions)

Stamus Contra Malum (we stand against evil)

Succisa Virescit (cut down, we grow back stronger)

Sum Quod Eris (I am what you will be - of death)

Summum Bonum (the supreme good)

Summum Malum (the supreme evil)

Sunt Lacrimae Rerum (there are tears for things)

Sunt Omnes Unum (they are all one)

Tabula Rasa (blank slate)

Transire Benefaciendo (to travel along while doing good)

Tu Fui Ego Eris (I was you; you will be me - of death)

Ubi Amor, Ibi Dolor (where there is love, there is pain)

Ultima Forsan (perhaps the last / sundial quote "perhaps your last hour")

Usque Ad Finem (until the end / fight to the death)

Vi Et Animo (with heart and soul)

Victoria Aut Mors (victory or death)

Vincit Qui Patitur (he conquers who endures)

Vita Ante Acta (a life done before - of reincarnation)

Vivere Militare Est (to live is to fight)

Vox Clamantis In Deserto (the voice of one crying in the wilderness)

There are also some longer ones that may not make good titles because of their length, but are still worth inclusion:

Aut Simul Stabunt Aut Simul Cadent (they will either stand together or fall together)

Flectere Si Nequeo Superos, Acheronta Movebo (if I can not reach Heaven I will raise Hell)

Forsan Et Haec Olim Meminisse Iuvabit (perhaps even these things will be good to remember one day)

Igitur Qui Desiderat Pacem, Praeparet Bellum (therefore whoever desires peace, let him prepare for war)

In Regione Caecorum Rex Est Luscus (in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king)

Minus Malum Toleratur Ut Maius Tollat (choose the lesser evil so a greater evil may be averted)

Quem Deus Vult Perdere, Dementat Prius (whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad)

Ubi Sunt, Qui Ante Nos Fuerunt? (Where are they, those who have gone before us?)

Virtus Junxit Mors Non Separabit (that which virtue unites, let not death separate)

[fairuzfan]

it's quite a dishonest framing that you say hussein was "regarding you with suspicion" baselessly even though you've publicly state on your blog how you believe zionism is an "intracommunity" discussion.

they at no point even mention that they blame you for "israel's actions". they assumed you were talking about zionism because of previous pointed statements you endorsed where you say zionism should be only discussed by jews. its not imagined, you straight up said this? and you claim that hussein is antisemitic for assuming you're saying the same thing again just with more inclusive language? And it coincided a few days after me posting that tributary post about "defining yourself as zionist or antizionist"? So he assumed that it was in relation to it? sure you might not have meant it about zionism this time, but with previous statements you've made/endorsed you don't exactly have the right to act like you have no idea why they would assume that and misconstrue this as an antisemitic attack where he's conflating zionism with judiasm when you literally agree that zionism should only be discussed by jews, which means you yourself are conflating zionism and judiasm.

but ok, i guess, they were just taking your words out of context because they're "antisemitic". I even saw this ask last month and assumed you were talking about zionism in your recent post because of this statement you published and told him privately thats what i assumed you were talking about. Not because of you being jewish. But because i remembered this statement you agreed with because i was so offended reading it. And yeah it's a really bad statement that I'll remember because of how antipalestinian it is so sorry I don't think you get to claim the moral highground???? You didn't exactly disagree with any part of this person's statements?????

And like I would have left this alone but hussein often gets called antisemitic by people you associate with and reblog from, and it really shows how little compassion you all have for Palestinians (which btw as I say over and over, we have a right to point out harmful rhetoric that impacts us) who have a "knee-jerk reaction" to these things when we quite literally see our communities call for the deaths of our friends and family by starvarion and bombing in the name of zionism and when we call it out irl we get called antisemitic. You could have like sent an ask or publicly clarified your intentions but you just jumped straight to calling him antisemitic. Which the onus of responsibility is on YOU because of your previous statements. Why would we assume you mean something different based on past experiences???

Rhetoric like "zionism is an intracommunity issue" is stuff that has literally led to death of our loved ones so of course we have "kneejerk reactions" when there is literal proof of you saying these things before. We are not doing this because you're Jewish, we are doing this because we see and experience first hand this rhetoric and youre perpetuating it blatantly and you have people who follow you who look to you for perspective on "israel/palestine". It's so disingenuous to claim he's an antisemite when he's literally finding common talking points zionists perpetuate against us and call it out. And saying "I don't support the likud government or Westbank settlers" means nothing to us because our families were expelled from palestine before likud and settlers happened. Trying to separate modern day zionism from its colonial roots from the 1800s is at its core anti-palestinian, no matter what other conversations you want to have.

Again like the only reason this matters is because people follow you and look to you for perspective AND you reblog/interact with people we have pointed out as harmful. I literally would not care enough to make this post if i didnt see your posts spread enough times around here. So it's not because you're jewish and framing it like that is really dishonest when the person pointing this out was a palestinian who lost family due to zionism throughout multiple generations of their lives.

[deewithani]

Just as a reminder, related to the COD post, Tumblr doesn't ask for ID to verify someone's age, so if someone puts up a 'Minors DNI' notice, the onus falls on the minor to not interact. We can block as much as we need, but we rely on others to be truthful.

Sure, people post their ages on their blogs (or even leave them blank), but that's completely user generated by the blog owner. I could say I was 80 and there would be no way for anyone to really know, tbh.

I can change my listed age to 18 right now if I wanted to. Would I be telling the truth? No, but how could you really tell?

We literally have no way to know (if we're not otherwise interacting with each other in a wider, more personal way) the age of any random person here. We just take what we see as the truth until we have proof otherwise.

We can block people all day long, but if someone follows your over-18 blog, and on their blog they say they're 22, are you sure? Are you sure they're not 16 and lying about their age?

So blog owners provide the warning, and it's up to you to heed that warning.

[mariacallous]

In 2022 I wrote an op-ed for NBC News Think about leg hair, of all things. The piece detailed a monthlong experiment during which I stopped shaving. Aside from one paragraph about bodily autonomy and Roe v. Wade, I thought it was a mild article. Boring, even.

The internet disagreed. Within an hour of publication, I started getting angry, all-caps emails. Then it started on Twitter. I was called everything from stupid and self-absorbed to a Sasquatch. I was accused of hating men and pressuring women.

The deluge lasted nearly two weeks. By the end of it, I had dozens of nasty emails, nearly a thousand social media notifications, and zero idea how to handle what I’d experienced.

Unfortunately, these instances of online harassment are becoming more common. In 2021, the Pew Research Center reported that 41 percent of US adults had experienced online harassment; the Anti-Defamation League reported an increase to 52 percent in 2023. Public and semipublic figures are especially at risk, as noted by recent studies on American journalists, Zimbabwean journalists, and female members of parliament in Sweden.

But the truth is, on social media anyone with an account can experience harassment. Here’s what to do if it happens to you.

Document Everything

Knee-deep in hate mail, I reached out to a former thesis adviser who’d written op-eds. How had he handled the trolls?

His reply: Document everything. If you have to report the harassment to a social platform or to law enforcement, you will need a body of evidence that proves the harassment.

Save the nasty emails in a special folder, either manually or by using keywords to filter and route all of the relevant mail automatically.

On social media, screenshot what people say. Doing this gives you lasting digital proof, which is important if the trolling comments disappear later on, either because the trolls deleted them or because someone reported the comments, which led to them being removed. Save all of these screenshots in a folder that can easily be shared with anyone investigating your harassment.

Documenting harassment is common advice, featured in resources ranging from writing-specific organizations like PEN America to wider organizations like the University of Chicago and the National Network to End Domestic Violence.

Don’t Respond

Another common piece of advice is “don’t feed the trolls.” In theory, if you don’t react to harassment, the trolls get bored and leave. Some have argued that this advice has failed us, as it puts the onus on the victim to stop the cyberbullying; it suggests that it’s not the trolls who need to stop but rather the victim who needs to turn the other cheek.

This is a fair critique; social media platforms should build better moderation systems and restrict users who breach standards on harassment. Ideally, events like the 2024 child safety hearing before US Congress will lead to changes that make the internet safer for everyone. In a perfect world, the onus is on Big Tech.

But internet safety is a work in progress, and in the meantime it’s on us to decide how we want to respond. Many of the accounts spamming me were obvious trolls. They had incendiary usernames and profile pictures. Looking at their comments, which were antagonistic at best, I knew I wouldn’t change their minds by responding. Nothing I could write would make them consider my point of view.

So I followed the American Psychological Association’s advice and let the storm pass. I logged off social media and routed the nasty emails into a special folder, out of sight. I spent my energy on things I enjoyed instead, no trolls involved.

Or Maybe Do Respond

Walking away isn’t the best option for everyone. If you choose to respond, there are both indirect and direct ways to address harassment. The former could include muting threads or blocking accounts. You could also report comments or users for behaviors that breach community standards, such as hate speech, threats, and bullying (which most platforms claim to prohibit). These options may prevent the same trolls from harassing you, or another user, in the future.

If you feel safe and want to respond directly, consider counterspeech, a strategy that addresses and undermines hate by redirecting the conversation in a constructive way. Some choose to reclaim hashtags, such as the K-pop stans who in 2020 flooded the #WhiteLivesMatter hashtag with K-pop videos.

Others create larger discussions around hateful posts, typically focusing not on the troll but on the content of their argument (so, not “You’re sexist” but “Saying XYZ is problematic because …”). This is exactly what I did, some six months after my experience, when I wrote about hate mail for HuffPost, focusing on sexism and the importance of dismantling it. Reframing the conversation helped me feel less powerless.

Though organizations like the United Nations recommend counterspeech, some research has suggested that it may be ineffective: While a 2021 study on anti-Asian hate found that counterspeech discouraged hate, another study on racism and homophobia saw mixed results.

Do Something You Enjoy

Whether or not you respond, give yourself time to work through your feelings. Do something you enjoy, like going to the gym, meditating, or playing your favorite video game. Anything goes!

Social support, in particular, is important for processing your experiences. This is because one of the goals of online harassment is to make you feel isolated; intentionally enjoying time with loved ones can combat this. An older 2014 study noted that social support can come from anyone in your life, ranging from your peers to your family. More recently, a 2020 study listed the myriad benefits of social support for those experiencing bullying, including increased confidence and decreased anxiety.

So text your friends and coworkers. Make dinner plans with family. Rant to your partner—or ask for a distraction. Any and all of these can help you feel less alone. You can also seek professional advice via a therapist or a cyberbullying hotline.

If you decide to take an extended break from the internet, ask a friend you trust to keep an eye on your social accounts. They can continue to take screenshots of new harassment and notify you if the frequency of incidents increases.

If the Harassment Escalates

If rude comments turn into stalking, hacking, doxing, or death threats, it’s time to contact the authorities and get legal assistance. Continue to document everything; you’ll want a body of proof to ensure you’re taken seriously. If you’re in immediate danger, call emergency services.

Practicing good cyber hygiene can help you protect your information. To deter hackers, use strong passwords, which are longer than 16 characters and include numbers and special characters. Don’t reuse passwords, and set up multifactor authentication to ensure that you’re notified if someone tries to log in to your account.

To deter doxing, stalking, and further harassment, adjust your privacy settings on social media. If possible, set your accounts to private until the storm passes. Also, depending on the platform, you should be able to limit the ability to reply to your posts so that only people you follow can republish your posts or leave comments. You can also just disallow comments entirely. If you have both professional and personal accounts, keep them separate so that work-related harassment is less likely to follow you home.

You may want to limit who can see your location data on social media, since many platforms tag every post with geolocation data unless you opt out. This is usually something you can turn off in your profiles’ privacy settings. Additionally, browser extensions like Privacy Party can help you keep your privacy settings on social media up to date automatically, so you don't have to think about it.

If things get so bad that you feel it's safest to minimize or erase your digital footprint, paid services like Delete Me can remove identifying information like your address, phone number, and social media activity from hundreds of online databases and data brokers. This makes it much harder for people to uncover this information in web searches. Services like Tweet Delete can automatically delete years worth of social media posts, replies, and likes—either wholesale or within a specific range—from your accounts.

Online harassment can be isolating and terrifying, but with a plan, you’ll be prepared to respond—and to mitigate its impacts on your life.

[nevzatboyraz44]

Zürafaların gölgeleri

"Rabbinin gölgeyi nasıl uzattığını görmedin mi? Eğer dileseydi, onu elbet hareketsiz kılardı. Sonra biz, güneşi ona delil kıldık." Furkân Suresi 45. Ayet

..........

Shadows of giraffes

“Have you not seen how your Lord lengthens the shadow? If He had willed, He could certainly have made it immobile. Then We made the sun a proof for it.” Surah Furqan, Verse 45

ظلال الزرافات

"ألم تر إلى ربك كيف يطيل الظل ولو شاء لجعله ثابتا ثم جعلنا الشمس عليه حجة" سورة الفرقان الآية 45

[nerdygaymormon]

I like when you post about scriptures, but I'm wondering how you respond when people use the clobber passages? They seem so clear and specific and anti-queer

Many people pull a verse from the scriptures and use it as proof for their viewpoint. When they do this with the clobber verses it puts the onus on the marginalized person to argue the verse was mistranslated or there's historical context that needs to be considered, and so on. That kind of interaction cedes power because the assumption is the other person is correct unless we can prove why it should be interpreted another way.

This kind of approach ignores that these verses are part of a long story arc. For example, in Deuteronomy it says men with damaged testicles can't worship with everyone else or be included in the temple, presumably this is referencing people who were made eunuchs in Egypt. Some people will pull out this chestnut and claim that any trans person who's had bottom surgery can't go to the temple or even be allowed to be baptized and join this church.

But to use the verse in Deuteronomy that way is to ignore that Isaiah later wrote that eunuchs would be welcomed and honored. It ignores the story of Daniel. It ignores what Jesus said about eunuchs and marriage. It ignores the eunuch who was the first gentile convert to Christianity. Seeing the story of the eunuchs across the Bible is important as they go from being excluded to being included. To only use the verse in Deuteronomy is to teach the wrong lesson.

When we look at the scriptures as a whole, there is an arc towards more inclusion, more justice, more room at the table. Whatever scriptures people pull out to condemn whole groups of folks doesn't stand up when we read the scriptures as a whole.

The scriptures are a record of people trying to make sense of what is happening in their lives. They are trying to make sense of their place in the world and what it means to be in relationship with the Divine and what it means to be in community with others. The scriptures include a lot of messiness and complications.

We can learn from their wrestle with these important questions. We can learn from how their answers evolved. We can engage in the same wrestle today.

What does it mean for me as a a queer individual to be in a relationship with God? What does it mean to live ethically under capitalism? What does it mean to be part of an empire (the United States)? What does it mean to be a good neighbor? What does it mean to live our faith in a world that has people of many faiths and of no faith? What does it mean to be in relationship with others in my religious community?

There are all sorts of ways in which scripture stories can continue to speak to us today. When I read the story of someone who was an outsider and then Jesus does not treat them as an outsider, I can relate with that. I don't feel incompatible with God, but there are some issues of compatibility when it comes to my church because I'm queer.

I think when people who are marginalized read the scriptures they will pull different messages compared to those who read from a place of comfort and privilege. Liberation theology, Black theology, womanist theology, and queer theology are all closer to the heart of texts which talk about being dominated by empires or being in exile.

This was a long answer to say when someone pulls out a particular verse as a weapon against me, I know when looking at the whole there is a beautiful story of growing acceptance and God values the marginalized

[moomingitz]

Nelson and Lindsey Thorndyke are not good parents. Everything in Sonic X that happened with their son, Chris, could have easily been avoided if they made the most basic sacrifices. It's a bit concerning how so many fans seem to make every excuse for them and put the onus all on their child as if it's unreleasable to want your parents to be far present in your life.

And in before someone brings up how they left work because Chris got a nothing burger cold, as some sort of "proof" that they're not shit parents after all or something. Man, if only Mr.Dumb and Mrs.Dumber could have left work to spend time with their kid all of the other times. They clearly have the means to. Also, Nelson proceeded to have a screaming match in front of his kid the second he got home, something a child doesn't need in their home life. So my point stands about these two being shitty parents who are responsible for messing up their kid.

[theconstitutionisgayculture]

i saw the post you reblogged about shinigami eyes and i dont get the onus against people having boundaries. What exactly is wrong with not wanting to see people saying transphobic things

Because it's weak ass bitch shit, for one. You can't "protect" yourself from opinions you don't like. For two, Shinigami Eyes has zero vetting. Literally people submit accounts and they get added as "transphobic". Even beyond the usual thing where even the slightest criticism of the trans community, or a trans person, is enough to get you labeled transphobic, Shinigami Eyes doesn't require a single shred of proof. People submit the names of people they argue with online to get back at them all the time. So even if you want to avoid transphobes, Shinigami Eyes is a terrible resource for that.

[thebardostate]

An Agnostic Manifesto

As far as the onus of proof is concerned, the theist and the atheist are in exactly the same position: neither has a greater duty to justify their position than the other. There should be no automatic presumption of atheism...

Theism is not 'bad science'; it is the very general hypothesis that there exists, in terms of an intelligent being, a true unifying explanation of the world, ourselves, our consciousness, and our capacity for good.

The agnostic principle: always seek reasons for beliefs, and do not make knowledge claims that are not adequately supported by the evidence... We should proportion the extent to which we are inclined to believe something by the weight of the evidence.

The evidence which is pointed to as supporting, or undermining, theism is ambiguous: it can be shown to be consistent both with theism and atheism without resorting to ad hoc or implausible maneuvers.

Since the evidence is ambiguous, commitment to either theism or atheism is, at least in part, an emotional response to the world, not a purely rational one. But this does not make either theism or atheism an irrational response. Theists regard the religious attitude as natural, built-in, and one which is valuable and to be encouraged and developed. Atheists, while often recognizing the response as natural, see it as apt to delude us, and as something to be exorcised. The difference is more temperamental than either side typically acknowledges.

Agnosticism as an attitude should not be viewed as final, but provisional, to be accompanied by an open-minded attitude, and a willingness to look at new evidence and arguments.

There are different shades of agnosticism, reflecting different views on how probable or improbable theism is. The admission that one doesn't know whether or not God exists is entirely compatible with either a theist or an atheist outlook. There can be belief without knowledge.

Even the kind of agnosticism that takes theism and atheism to be equiprobable is compatible with a practical and emotional commitment to a religious way of life. [The agnostic participation in religion in this case is more akin to participation in a game of make-believe, e.g. English composer Ralph Vaughan Williams.]

Agnosticism is part of the wider phenomenon of uncertainty, and uncertainty is positive in so far as it promotes creativity, theoretical progress, and social tolerance. Agnosticism thus promotes religious pluralism: peaceful co-existence between different religious faiths, and between religious and humanist groups. What it does not promote or imply is a relativistic view of truth.

From Agnosticism: A Very Short Introduction (2010) by Robin Le Poidevin (pp. 117-118). Oxford University Press

[endreal]

hey endreal, recently prismatic-bell reblogged one of your posts with an addition. i wanted 2 let you know that xe is a zionist, and if you'd like proof fleshdyke on here has compiled screenshots in a recent post. thought u might want 2 know.

I'm going to set aside the claim you're making for a moment, not because of any particular truth or untruth about it, but because it's veracity is irrelevant for what I want to respond to.

recently prismatic-bell reblogged one of your posts with an addition

what post was it? what was the addition? how long ago was recently?

I hardly consider myself to be tumblr famous but my blog is, to me, pretty busy. When things are fairly normal I average ~3500 notes a week. Currently I've gotten almost 1200 just in the past 24 hours because a post of mine ended up reblogged by someone with a large following. I frequently miss posts/reblogs/replies from bloggers I am personal friends with because there's just so much. I have no anchor point for the addition or the post or even the timeframe you're referring to.

xe is a zionist

is this claim relevant to the comment left on the post that was reblogged? I, like most people, tend not to be thrilled when someone whose ideologies are significantly different to my own is actively engaging with my stuff but also, in this instance, why does it matter? if I don't want to engage with zionist content then tumblr provides pretty standard mediocre tools to curate one's online experience via blocking, tag blacklisting, etc. Those tools allow me to curate my online experience, which can also include limiting people who respond to my content in ways I find objectionable. But the fact of the matter is a post I made that was reblogged or commented on by another blogger is now part of their online experience, and my responsibility as a creator is to put things into the world that reflect my worldview and values, but beyond the extent to which they are engaging in objectionable ways with my content, do I have an obligation to curate my audience?

if you'd like proof fleshdyke on here has compiled screenshots in a recent post

citing the existence of evidence is not the same as providing evidence. when making a claim like this the onus of proof lies on you to provide, not on me to discover. Also, who are you? Behind the veil of anonymity I have no impetus to trust you to be telling me things with my best interest in mind.

lastly, if you'll pardon me for being blunt: so what? people generally don't usually send messages like this unless there is a purpose to it. Your stated purpose is "u might want 2 know", and now I do know. I know that you have made a claim and cited that another user has evidence to it. that's what I know. what I don't know is what's your purpose, what's your intention, and specifically what action are you trying to motivate me to take.

I recognize that a lot of things in this response are going to sound critical and inhospitable, especially because I suspect you sent this message with intent to share information you felt was important. But whether the information you wanted to share is true or not, what this message actually is? Is gossip.