theoppositeofstupid

[theoppositeofstupid]

So, you call yourself an anarchist.

What happens to all the disabled people who can't survive without government assistance if you get what you want and the government is destroyed?

This is a genuine question. I have seen far, FAR too many self-called anarchists who have made it blatantly clear that they don't care enough to think about that - or worse, would be happy to see all the disabled people die due to not being able to get the support they need.

As a disabled person myself, who has done professional carework for other disabled people, and who has a lot of disabled friends, I very much agree with this concern.

I'm most (if not only) interested in schools of anarchist thought such as anarchosyndicalism and anarchosocialism where the idea of a social safety net and mutual social support is embedded in the theoretical conceptualization of a post-state society. I am also not interested in a violent transition to anarchy, but rather a peaceful and voluntary one - a violent transition will just kill the most vulnerable among us first, including people like me and my friends.

That said, I very much also take issue with anarchists who think all medical concerns can be handled via mutual aid. That is not the case. Regulations and professionalization will still be needed to make sure that people who need care receive it, whether that's making sure someone who needs 24/7 care receives it, making sure allergens are labeled, making sure accessibility standards exist, making sure that brain surgeons are qualified, making sure medical devices have sufficient quality control, making sure that practitioners who fuck up can be held accountable, or making sure that no one is putting borax in the milk again.

How can standards and regulations be enforced without a state? In that, I look to grassroots collectives, Indigenous models of community/society, and also honestly organizations like Wikipedia, which do a great job of enforcing legitimate standards in a complex situation with lots of stakeholders in a large-scale, almost-entirely-volunteer operation.

Perhaps in practical execution, it will end up being a question of "absolute minimum necessary hierarchy and rules" rather than "absolutely no hierarchy and rules." Which I know a lot of other anarchists would take issue with me for even saying. But at the same time, when I got hired as an in-home caretaker, we were all informed in the training that it is a literal crime to no-call, no-show a shift. Why? Because some people NEED 24/7 care, and if we no-call, no-showed a shift, someone could get badly hurt, end up going hungry or sitting in their own shit for hours, experience significant medical complications, or even die. And in circumstances like that, yes, I DO think there needs to be enforceable rules.

Similarly, I used to work at a treatment center that NEEDED to be staffed 24/7. I don't like hierarchy, I don't believe in the way hierarchy is used to invalidate and prioritize and dehumanize people, but in that situation there DOES have to be at least some kind of "the buck stops here" arrangement. If no one else can come in, the residential manager or another upper-level staff member is required to come in, period, and that's the way it should be, because someone NEEDS to be there.

How do we reconcile these competing needs while fully respecting people's autonomy and dismantling the state? Honestly, I don't know the answer to that question.

There are a lot of theorists and activists who are much more knowledgeable about and dedicated to figuring out these answers myself, and in many ways I look to them. This is much like how I feel about prison abolition: I don't know how certain important issues will be solved, but I believe Angela Davis when she, in all her experience and extensive work on this issue, says they CAN be solved.

But realistically I don't think any true anarchist society is going to come about in my lifetime, so, in a lot of ways, I figure people will cross that bridge when/if we come to it. In the meantime, I see anarchism as a goal and an ideal to work toward, not necessarily something that needs to be planned out to the point of viability right now.

[theoppositeofstupid]

"If you do the usual Doomer Leftist Edgelord Internet Thing and go "lol well guess Trump is a dictator for life now and there will be no more elections and we live in Gilead forever," often with barely-disguised glee that at least those stupid liberals are getting punished, you're, well, also a fascist."

"We're living through the ongoing fascist collapse of the United States but I still gotta clean the kitchen and go to work tomorrow" sure is the mood right now, huh.

[theoppositeofstupid]

what do you mean still in development? capsule endoscopes have been a thing for *decades*

very excited about this new medical option where we swallow a vibrator

[theoppositeofstupid]

nah, this reads more like social anxiety to me? (Or in this SPECIFIC case it's anxiety over having a politically charged job when jobs are a frequent small talk conversation topic--making a low stakes conversation suddenly high stakes)

small talk goals: say something both people can agree with (because agreeing is pleasant and bonding) and then gradually narrow in on a more specific common interest you agree on and enjoy talking about.

that's why people often start with broad innocuous stuff like weather or sports

GOd okay I went to my neighbor’s housewarming, and don’t get me wrong, I love parties (if everybody doesn’t give me  all of their attention all the time and tell me that i’m smart and funny and pretty I’ll DIE), but I forget how stressful it is to introduce yourself to new people when you work in a politically charged field.  The whole evening was this:

Party Guest:  So, have you lived in the area long?

[Okay, let’s think. White male, thirties, tall, muscle tee, sandals, wedding ring, but here without a partner.  I just overheard him complaining about tariffs, so he’s either left-leaning or a disillusioned republican.  Good sign, definitely not MAGA.  Ah, that’s right, he brought his daughters – ages 5 and 7, well-behaved in a crowd – and they’re wearing princess dresses… doting father with an active role in raising his kids, lets them choose their own outfits… my gut is telling me heterosexual male feminist.  That could be good or bad – statistically speaking, he believes in climate change… but that means 50/50 odds of anti-nuclear sentiment.  I need more information, but I must answer carefully.  We’re rapidly approaching the Question.]

Me: Not long!  I just moved down from Boston a few months ago –

[Ball is in his court.  Boston has been in the news lately for being an immigrant sanctuary city, but that’s mostly local news – I’ll get information based on body language.  Oh, I may have made a tactical error.  This is an opportunity for sports rivalry to come up, and I am ill-educated on the subject.  Quick, I need a counter maneuver.] 

Me: – but I actually grew up in the area.

[Good save, and a decent delaying action.  If he takes the bait, I can redirect the conversation to local childhood reminiscence.  He’s had two margaritas, and they’re starting to affect him – talking a bit too loud, and his expansive hand gestures bespeak more than typical New Jerseyan gregariousness.  That could be to my advantage… unless it makes him too bold].

Party Guest:  Coming back home for family, or is it a work thing?

[Shit, okay, he asked about work.  This could be the endgame… but he’s foolishly thrown me a lifeline.  I can’t lie, the hosts already know the real answer, but I can dissemble by playing to his fatherly conversational weak spots.]

Me:  I moved for work, but my family does live nearby, so that’s a nice perk as well.  I get to see my nephews a lot more often!  The eldest just turned five.

[That should do it.  My nephews are about the same age as his kids, which will build a rapport and redirect the conversation back to himself.  It should be easy to get him talking about his daughters.  Unless… oh no.  He’s two drinks in on a Sunday night and working on a third in front of his children, while his wife stays home.  She wakes up earlier than him, potentially much earlier.  He’s been talking about the economy a lot.  Damn, recently laid off?  He’s going to focus on work.]

Party Guest: That’s awesome.  What sort of job?

[The brilliant bastard.  He’s good, he’s very good.  Truly a worthy opponent.  Pierced right through every single gambit and went straight to the Question. Have I met my match? Will I finally be humbled?  It’s do or die.]

Me:  I’m an engineer at an energy company.

[Alea iacta est.]

Party Guest:  Energy?

[Last chance.  He's intelligent and fiendishly clever, but hope against hope that he’s more well-read in Aristotle than Rutherford.  This should dead-end him]

Me:  Nuclear, kind of. Fusion, not fission.

Party Guest:  Oh, that sounds cool.

Me:  Mhm.  So, how do you know Bill and Stephanie?

Party Guest:  I was in film school with Bill.  Have you seen his documentary?

[Ha. Another victory, all the sweeter for having been hard-fought. Time for a celebratory cornichon, maybe some crackers]

[theoppositeofstupid]

It's the other way around, actually!

"Quirk" means something like to angle, to bend, to put off kilter. Orginally a verbal "twist."

So quirky means odd and off kilter. It's actually very similar to the etymology of queer, when you think about it. :)

googledocs you are getting awfully uppity for something that can’t differentiate between “its” and “it’s” correctly

[theoppositeofstupid]

okay but is anyone going to talk about how he prefaced this with "you're not men, you're boys" and went on to advocate that they be used "for sex and food"???

like how does this dude think about underaged boys exactly??

yikes

[theoppositeofstupid]

man, you are not kidding

"why must my child TALK to me"

I ended up on r/ADHDparenting (a subreddit about parenting kids with ADHD, not about being a parent with ADHD) and Jesus fuck.

[theoppositeofstupid]

Terfs are constantly tripping over themselves to show their fascist roots.

This post was ostensibly supposed to be an attack on surrogacy, but in it they choose to take a deeply anti-feminist line of attack in the process. This is the problem with cultural feminism. It always comes back to some mystical understanding of the female essence or whatever the fuck in a way that just repackages patriarchal ideas and harms women.

The fact that you're so desperate to attack gay men rather than stick to the actual issues with surrogacy (capitalism) that you would shame people for using formula, something that is necessary for many women? Absolutely disgusting. The ability to choose formula is so fucking necessary that I would absolutely 100% argue that attacking it is anti-feminist.

Have any of these people who have reblogged this even given birth? Absolutely any of them? Have any fucking one of them ever tried breast feeding??

Because breast feeding is fucking difficult. It is time consuming. It uses so much energy. It. Fucking. Sucks. Having the ability to choose formula allows you to actually be independent of your child at some point if you can't make enough breast milk to freeze (or if you don't have the ability to freeze and reheat your milk at a later time.)

You think it's feminist to shame someone for not wanting to be plugged into a machine like a fucking dairy cow for hours a day??? Really????

How about the women* who can't work because their job won't allow them to pump? Either because they don't have laws protecting them or their company violates the laws? How are they supposed to be financially independent?

You know why I stopped breast feeding? I was sitting in my kitchen, attached to my breast pump, as my ex stomped around the house in a fit. The scary part was, my mom was sitting right next to me. My ex was going through a full breakdown and letting the mask slip in front of my mom. I had the sudden realization that if these slips could happen in front of my mom, how bad was it going to be when she was gone?

I suddenly realized how vulnerable I was attached to this machine. If my ex wanted to start beating me while I was attached to it, I would have a difficult time getting away without breaking my very expensive pump (which I would also get beaten for doing). I have ADHD and serious memory problems, but I remember the exact fucking moment I decided to switch to formula because it was the only way to keep myself safe.

My ex did not want me to switch our baby to formula for the reasons OP listed above, but I somehow made it happen. Looking back I am actually shocked I got away with it.

The demonization of formula is fucking bad for women. We can talk about the ways in which companies like Nestlé use predatory practices in order to force impoverished mothers into using formula, but again a lot of these arguments are about capitalism itself. Formula in and of itself should be celebrated. It helps women be independent, it feeds babies who can't drink breastmilk, it helps children who are adopted... Etc.

I mean, what are adopted children supposed to do? What about babies whose mothers die in childbirth? Are they just supposed to die??

This is why I hate terfs so much. Cultural feminism is so deeply fucking unserious.

[theoppositeofstupid]

The other day there was a post going around about how people seriously needed to stop using a certain word, but they only ever gave the first letter of the word in the post and I was sitting there running through a mental dictionary of "w" words like "you know, I think your educational post might not be as effective as you think it is"

we have GOT to kill tiktok/twitter self-censorship i just witnessed a grown adult say the word “smex” out loud to our professor

[theoppositeofstupid]

popular culture used to be very much about eroticism. rockstars used to be on stage in sequins and thongs and thigh high boots playing guitars like they were masturbating. girls used to wear velvet mini dresses and no bras and red-brick-brown lipstick and mascara on their bottom lashes. people used to have body hair on television and in the movies. people used to be sweaty. people used to touch each other over denim and under cotton. foreplay used to be staring at someone over the rim of a glass across a bar across a park across a dinner table. people used to want. i think we’ve lost something

[theoppositeofstupid]

The US finally takes aim at truck bloat - The Verge

This week, the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) stunned safety advocates by proposing new vehicle rules that it says will help reduce pedestrian deaths in America. The new rules appear aimed directly at the trend of increasingly massive SUVs and trucks, which have been shown to be more deadly to pedestrians than smaller and midsize vehicles.

Never in its 50-plus years in existence has the regulator issued new rules for automakers requiring them to change their vehicle designs to better prevent pedestrian fatalities. If enacted, the new rules could change how vehicles are designed in the US — permanently.

“It’s good to see NHTSA acknowledge that a myopic focus on pedestrian detection — which is imperfect — is no substitute for actually regulating car bloat,” said David Zipper, a senior fellow at the MIT Mobility Initiative and a Verge contributor. 

In recent years, NHTSA has issued a handful of new requirements aimed at reducing the number of pedestrian deaths. Earlier this year, the agency announced that automatic emergency braking would be required in all new vehicles. It also updated the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP), also known as the five-star safety rating, to account for technology that can help reduce pedestrian injuries and deaths. But it’s never before taken aim at vehicle design.

The rules announced this week would update the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS), the government’s bible for everything that’s required in a new vehicle before it’s sold — from steering wheels to rearview mirrors — to set testing procedures to simulate head-to-hood impact, with the aim of reducing head injuries. If enacted, automakers will have to test their vehicles using crash test dummies representing adult and child pedestrians for the first time. NHTSA says the changes could save up to 67 lives every year.

“The US has never used pedestrian crash test dummies officially,” said Angie Schmitt, author of Right of Way: Race, Class, and the Silent Epidemic of Pedestrian Deaths in America. “I thought they were going to continue to avoid doing that even though Congress had sort of told them to do this — but apparently not.”

The proposed rules come amid a deadly period for pedestrians in this country. Each year, cars kill roughly 40,000 Americans. But while automakers have become very good at protecting people inside of vehicles, they have essentially neglected the safety of people outside of them.

SUVs and trucks, two of the most popular segments in the US, have become larger and heavier than ever before. In 2023, 31 percent of new cars in America weighed over 5,000 pounds (2.27 tons), compared to 22 percent in 2018, according to a recent investigation by The Economist. And with the shift to electric vehicles, many of those vehicles have become even heavier. The Ford F-150 Lightning has a curb weight of around 6,500 pounds, roughly 60 percent heavier than its gas equivalent.

Meanwhile, pedestrian deaths have skyrocketed in recent years. Between 2013 and 2022, pedestrian fatalities increased 57 percent, from 4,779 to 7,522, NHTSA reports. In 2022, 88 percent of pedestrian deaths occurred in single-vehicle crashes.

“I think it will exert positive pressure,” Schmitt said of the new proposal, “and maybe rein in some of the industry’s worst excesses.”

The shape of a vehicle, especially the hood, also plays a critical role in determining whether a pedestrian can survive being struck. Vehicles with hood heights of more than 40 inches and blunt front ends angled at greater than 65 degrees were 44 percent more likely to cause fatalities, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

Automakers often point to the increasing use of technology in vehicles — cameras, blindspot detection, automatic braking — to help reduce pedestrian deaths. But rarely do they address the role that vehicle design plays in crash fatalities. That’s because big trucks and SUVs are not only popular but also better moneymakers than smaller vehicles. SUVs have a profit margin that’s 10–20 percent higher than smaller cars because they command a higher price while costing only slightly more to manufacture.

Safety advocates celebrated the news, while also noting that vehicle design is only one piece in a large, complex puzzle to make roads safer. That includes lower speed limits, infrastructure improvements, and increased enforcement of traffic laws. Many note that Europe has already gone much further to protect pedestrians, enacting rules that would prevent many of the largest vehicles produced by US manufacturers from being sold on the continent.

“Considering NHTSA estimates the new standard would save 67 lives a year, it is a step in the right direction, but it still falls behind what Europe has successfully done,” Cathy Chase, president of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, said. “Numerous proven solutions must be employed to improve the safety of all vulnerable road users.”

The new NHTSA proposal is an important step, but it’s just the first of many needed to turn this crisis around.

[theoppositeofstupid]

I have had Thoughts about ferengi infants

Ferengi babies are born underwater and like tadpoles, and are kept in what is effectively a large water tank until they can get out themselves. Their ears finish developing before their eyes do, they do echolocation until they are fully ambulatory on legs with open eyes. The teeth are like little needles and they lose them Twice. To worrying mothers you can sell “infant waters premium” or any kind of Fancy water to ensure the baby grows Strong and Healthy, but really poor ferengi just pull groundwater and it works the same. You generally put a few strips of latinum in there with it so they get used to how it vibrates, its shine, its value, before they even get out of the pond.

[theoppositeofstupid]

there are also specific animal species for which this is not true-- for example, elephants have dramatically shorter lifespans in zoos than in the wild

(although this data is arguable)

orcas also do very poorly in captivity

(although notably they are typically kept by marine parks, not zoos)

but a lot of data about animal welfare comes from zoos themselves, which are very invested in understanding and improving. and there are plenty of species that not only fare better, but are contributing to the well-being of endangered wild populations

6 zoo myths that arent true

[theoppositeofstupid]

I have.... never encountered this problem, huh. Does your fandom skew particularly young, maybe?

I am incredibly serious right now when I beg you all, please, and if you have Twitter or Tiktok or whatever to please spread the word: click on an author's profile on Ao3.

You want to know if an author has written more? Want to know if they're still writing? Want to see more from them? Want to know if they've written a trope or kink or sex scenario you enjoy?

Click on their name. And look at their profile.

I cannot tell you how many times in the last six months someone has read a new or newer fic of mine and said they (a new reader who has read nothing else I've done) "can't wait to see what you do next!" I've written 50+ fics and over a million words already.

"I don't know if you're still writing..." click on my profile. I am. I literally wrote a 128k+ fic for that ship last month.

"Would you ever do X?" "Please do Y!" I already did. Click on my name and look at my works.

Archive of our Own is a library. It's an archive. Not social media. It is your responsibility to fight back against the laziness that corporate algorithms have trained into you.

Click my author name. Just click it. Just click it.

Before you demand more, or ask if a writer will do XYZ, or wonder if the author still writing, or anything - click on their profile. Click on the author's profile.

I'm not trying to be mean or condescending or anything like that. I'm just exhausted. It's disheartening and frustrating to repeat myself ad nauseam, because someone couldn't take thirty seconds to do the tiniest bit of work to see if I've written lately, if I've written more for their ship, or scan my works to see if I've written what they're asking for. Please. Please. I'm begging.

Click the author's name, and explore before you ask.

[theoppositeofstupid]

yeah i was gonna say, the TV companies absolutely did not encourage it

and that's why all the old videos and stuff had warnings about redistributing or copying or broadcasting

“To protect their copyright, streaming sites do not allow for screenshotting of any kind.”

Hey remember VHS where you bought a box to plug into your tv and you could legally record whatever was playing and then own it for free forever

[theoppositeofstupid]

Hanging out with old people rules because after a while they trust you enough to confess to murder totally unprompted

[theoppositeofstupid]

but also, just to step away from the very good conversation in this post and back to the original anon message-

anons like that are probably bait, and you aren't required to jump to justify yourself to mystery strangers with questionable intentions

i am sorry if i missed it but i have not seen any posts about transandrophobia and wanted to know your stance.

Hey there. I have seen the term transandrophobia, and I'll be honest, I don't quite fully understand it yet.

Like, I get the concept of the word, a type of bigotry experienced as part of a trans-mans experience (i think). But the concept proper is a lot more convoluted. I am reading every thread I come by that mentions it, trying to understand all the sides of an argument when I see them so I can try and understand the greater conversations going on around it.

I'm a cis woman, so a trans experience is not something I have, and a man's experience is not something I have. Put them both together, and I definitely don't have it.

While a trans man and I may have some overlap in experiences in being assigned the same gender at birth, their experiences will also wildly differ to mine.

A lot of the things I have seen are post critical of the concept in a specific way and arguments below, or ....posts very much in favour of the concept in a specific way with arguments below.

When I do not have enough experience to know who is even seen as condescending by some, exclusionary by some and struggle to understand the nuances that people are saying...I just don't currently feel comfortable reblogging anything about it.

It isn't because the conversations aren't important, they are. But I have seen trans men and trans women hurt by these conversations and I am really not willing to rush in to reblog something just for the sake of being involved. Not that I am saying you are suggesting that, Anon, I am just explaining my own thought process.

It is not that allies have NO role. Boosting voices is important. But if I don't understand what is going on, then I am kind of just putting a mic up to a fight in a language I don't speak. The chances of accidentally boosting something I don't agree with or something that is actively harmful go waaay up. And no one needs my take THAT bad.

Better that I just listen for now, keep reading, ask questions when I get a bit more well versed. Besides, there are lots of people kind of also...hashing out parts of it all, I think. Like trying to figure out what exactly it encompasses, when and how to talk about it in a way that is not accidentally undermining some experiences. Like, I think I have seen people on the same relative side of the debate having wildly different interpretations of the parameters.

No one needs my opinion on the view when they haven't even built the walls and windows yet.