triakis-octahedron

[triakis-octahedron]

deleting files makes me so scared what if i Needed That

[triakis-octahedron]

I should be able to temporarily give control of my body over to an extrovert that can get me into fun social situations before putting me back in control so i dont have to deal with the whole social anxiety panic lead up to a fun thing

[triakis-octahedron]

i dont want this post to be like one of those "if you arent talking about this then you're evil" moral ocd posts but. i gotta talk about this.

i only just today heard about Kumanjayi White, a 24 year old disabled Warlpiri man who was killed by northern territory police on May 27th. He was handcuffed and forced to the ground, face down, with an officers knee on his neck. He was walking around a grocery store, by himself. A worker at the grocery store described him, saying, "One look and you can tell he's got special needs".

A poor and disabled Aboriginal man was killed in the northern territory and i can't help but notice the similarities to George Floyd. Murdered in a public place, knee on the back of his neck. Only difference is i havent heard a word about this anywhere, in the news or otherwise, since it occured 2 and a half fucking weeks ago. where's the anger? i dont like making political posts, i hope this doesnt break containment its just. god its fucking pissing me off right now.

[triakis-octahedron]

in 2020 people were protesting with signs that said "432" . that was the number of Aboriginal deaths in custody since 1991. from 1991 to 2020, 432 Aboriginal people died in police custody.

today that number is 597.

from 432 in 30 years, to 165 in less than 5. thats fucking disgusting.

and of course nothing is being done about it. the police force has done an investigation into the police force and found that the police force did nothing wrong. wow!

i dont have a call to action. i dont have a way to fix this. im just pissed off.

[triakis-octahedron]

"these researchers published a paper on something that literally any of us could have told you 🙄" ok well my supervisors wont let me write something in my thesis unless I can back it up with a citation so maybe it's a good thing that they're amplifying your voice to the scientific community in a way that prevents people from writing off your experiences as annecdotal evidence

[triakis-octahedron]

you resisted the forcefemmification beams for too long

Nope. Completely incorrect and wrong.

This is a decision that I made for myself. I made this choice because it's who I want to be. Not because someone else wanted me to for their own pleasure.

[triakis-octahedron]

the horseless carriage implies the existence of a "horse"

[triakis-octahedron]

you resisted the forcefemmification beams for too long

Nope. Completely incorrect and wrong.

This is a decision that I made for myself. I made this choice because it's who I want to be. Not because someone else wanted me to for their own pleasure.

[triakis-octahedron]

Pride month : Make yourself proud today :: Spite month : Make yourself spout today

[triakis-octahedron]

As AI art gets harder to clock, I feel like we are going to need to have a discussion about attribution and it's probably going to bum some people out.

Because the surest way to avoid platforming, reblogging, or encouraging AI art posting is to know where every image you share originated and that's 1) boring, tedious research and 2) extremely limiting in what you feel you can reblog. But if unattributed images never gets traction, people will start attributing their images.

I've been guilty of this in the past, but for a while now it's been my policy that if I can't verify the origin, I don't share the image. That goes for stuff like screen grabs of headlines too -- more than once I've avoided spreading misinformation by saving a post to research before I reblog, then seeing the post refuted before I've been able to verify it.

And I usually try to attribute photos I take -- case in point, the "woman with shrimp" post gets a lot of attention but not one comment about it being AI, despite it being pretty similar to something you'd get from an AI. That's because I clearly state it's in a museum and link to its catalogue page.

I'm not saying this to scold anyone -- I think yelling at the Internet to cite its sources is very much a losing game -- but because I don't see this discussed much. We're such fertile ground to be fooled by AI art because we've grown accustomed to not questioning the origins of any given image. And of course I also want to encourage both OPs to attribute their images and rebloggers to verify unattributed ones.

[triakis-octahedron]

Scolopendrid centipede (no common English name), Edentistoma octosulcatum, Scolopendridae

Found in Southeast Asia

Photo 1 by sparkn, 2 by vinceadam2017, 3-4 by dirkm, 5 by neymark, 6 by nickvolpe, and 7 by vojtablaze

[triakis-octahedron]

here is the albino earthworm I found today! it does not look like much at first glance, because there are many earthworms that are normally unpigmented and look much like this one.

but take a closer look at the head and you’ll see that the prostomium—the little lobe that comes off the first segment—is tanylobous, having creases until segment 2. that means it’s genus Lumbricus, which are all usually a dark reddish color!

here is the albino meeting another juvenile, a Lumbricus terrestris. I’m unsure if the albino is L. terrestris or rubellus, and will need to wait for it to grow up to be able to tell.

no matter what it is, it’s a privilege to see and raise this little oddity, I will keep you all updated on its progress!

[triakis-octahedron]

when the subject of "why do people believe things that are seriously wrong and harmful" comes up it feels like you kinda hear one of two perspectives:

"oh, that's easy! it's because they're fundamentally Bad people who want to hurt others and choose their beliefs to justify that! :) hope this helps"

or

"they just don't have access to the same information we do. look at this person who was raised in a cult! don't you feel sorry for her?"

and like, yes, fine, some people were in fact raised in cults, but what i wish people would understand is that the bulk of it is just normal human flaws, like:

they want to believe stuff that makes them feel smart and cool and like they've figured everything out (you also do this)

they want to believe stuff that makes them feel like their emotions are justified and grounded in reality, and that the people they want to hurt deserve to be hurt (you also do this)

they form conclusions before they've processed all the relevant information, and cling to that first impression even when new info comes to light (you also do this)

they pick up beliefs from the people around them because they want to be liked and fit in, not because the beliefs are good or true (you also do this)

they come up with reasons that the stuff that benefits them (and the people they like and identify with) is actually overwhelmingly best for everyone and obviously the right thing to do (you also do this)

they pay more attention to stuff that supports what they already believe and avoid looking in places that might show them otherwise (you also do this)

they listen to people who talk like 'one of them' and ignore others (you also do this)

they come up with reasons to dismiss people with conflicting viewpoints as obviously in bad faith or ignorant or a shill or evil (you also do this)

they fail to take their own beliefs seriously sometimes, and take their beliefs way too seriously other times, in a selective way that lets them do the things they already wanted to do (you also do this)

the very ways they construct the ideas of 'knowledge' and 'wisdom' and 'belief' and 'understanding' are biased so that what they don't want to believe comes under lots of scrutiny and what they do want to believe receives less (you also do this)

you, dear reader, are presumably right about everything and were correct to die on every hill you've ever died on, but the difference between you and someone who's wrong about important stuff doesn't look like "well they're inherently evil and i'm not", it probably looks like a combination of:

natural environment (they would have been exposed to different information than you regardless of their choices)

being in the right place at the right time (your particular profile of flaws and virtues happened to be what was needed to lead you to the right conclusions, they had the opposite experience)

random luck (you doubled down on what felt right to believe but wasn't, but it turned out to be inconsequential, or even right for different reasons, while they doubled down on what turned out to be a horrible mistake distorting their entire worldview)

you do less of the things in the previous list, and over time the difference between you and them adds up

and, look, i also do these things. the nicest and most thoughtful people i've ever met do these things. if you meet someone who never does any of these things, i dunno, give them a fucking medal or something.

i know you're doing your best. we're all doing our best.

[triakis-octahedron]

Tumblr has a fun magic feature where an innocuous statement can spawn a new entity either to punctuate a joke or to spring forth a fully formed mirror nemesis to the OP

[triakis-octahedron]

One of the main problems around people with personality disorders (particularly cluster B), psychotic disorders, OSDD/DID/other CDDs or other stigmatised mental conditions is, well... Everything we do gets put back onto our disorder. Every fault, every misstep, every mistake is used as proof to say that the stigma of us all being horrible people is right.

We can say "not everyone with x disorder harms people, and in fact we're more likely to BE harmed and abused than we are to hurt others" as much as we like--and of course, that's a true statement. But the moment someone with a stigmatised mental illness does something wrong, it's "of course you'd do xyz, you're a narcissist" or "checks out with the psychosis".

Someone with ASPD could cut someone off for any valid reason, but anyone else could spin it into "yeah, that's sociopaths for you". Someone with psychosis could wrongfully accuse someone of something and without being given a chance to apologise, suddenly it's "this is why we don't trust delusional people like you" and you're discredited from here on out. Someone with DID could genuinely forget that their alter had an argument with someone and be trying to sort it out, but no one wants to hear that something was forgotten in the amnesia, so and all they get is "see, people with DID just blame everything on their alters".

People with stigmatised disorders are just like anyone else. They're not evil or uniquely capable of harm, but that also means they're not incapable of making mistakes. Everyone is entitled to their own limits but I think people need to be more aware that disabled people can make genuine mistakes and one slip up or argument doesn't mean that pwNPD is secretly manipulating you. Sometimes people are manipulative and you need to be able to tell the difference--just like neurotypicals, disabled people can be abusive. But blaming mistakes or even genuine malice on someone's disorder does nothing but harm a marginalised group of people. If you wouldn't say "of course you would, you're neurotypical" to someone abusing someone else or if that wouldn't make sense to you, why would you do it to disabled people?

[triakis-octahedron]

He's right we're just like this.