uplatescroller

[uplatescroller]

I was today years old when I found out my dad ghosted the Brazilian military

[uplatescroller]

“You put porn in child safe spaces.” Then why do the “child safe spaces” have ratings and tags, Karen?

[uplatescroller]

Okay, tumblr, I'm giving you a tricky one. Let's talk about mandatory arrest laws on domestic violence charges.

Early studies on domestic violence found that abusers who were arrested were less likely to recidivate, or be arrested again for doing the same thing. This resonated with the law enforcement community, who in general assumes that arrests are a good idea and solve problems, so many police departments around the country eventually adopted mandatory arrests on domestic calls: if anyone is visibly injured, the officers must arrest the "primary aggressor."

Let's make this as simple as possible.

Officer arrests "primary aggressor." There are two possibilities here. 1) The "primary aggressor" is the abuser. 2) the "primary aggressor" is the abused person, who has been provoked.

Option 1: Primary Aggressor is Abuser

This is probably the more common scenario. The officer has arrested the abuser, before the victim is ready to leave and become a survivor. The victim has been tormented on a daily basis; they are panicked and terrified at the thought of their only support system and the person their life revolves around going to jail; they often do not want to press charges.

Even if they are later on in the cycle and ready to leave, they know instinctively that this is going to make the abuser furious and also that the abuser has to come out of jail sometime. As a matter of simple survival, they know the justice system cannot protect them (because it has not protected them). So they try to mitigate: get the charges dropped.

Cops say, tough luck, it wasn't up to you, now only the prosecutor can drop the charges. Prosecutor refuses, because they believe this is the only way to fight domestic violence.

The amount of times that a victim of domestic violence comes to me pleading to get their abuser out of jail is... I don't know if I can describe it. It's unreal. It's so common that it's one of those running jokes in the office that's not a joke. (To be clear, that is not a joke that disrespects the [usually] women involved; they are struggling against a system that is causing irreparable damage to them and their lives as well, and we understand that completely.)

The whole endeavor becomes a desperate quest to get the charges undone. Then, when she's ready to leave (I know abuse happens to more people than women), and she does want to press charges, she has already probably dropped them multiple times. She is "unreliable." She has a "reputation."

Option 2: The "Primary Aggressor" is the Victim

I similarly can't describe how often this happens. I'm always giving people the link to Lundy Bancroft's book Why Does He Do That. The stories they tell are heartbreaking: abusive men trying to take away their children, trying to trap them inside the house, cheating right in front of them, chipping away at all their self-esteem until they crack and crack and crack.

When this kind of scenario happens, police show up. Police are often men, who like guns, who are drawn to positions of authority. They encounter, in a "typical" scenario, a man who is now cool as a cucumber and manipulative as a snake, telling the officer that she's bipolar or borderline (a common misdiagnosis for people who have complex PTSD) and she's off her meds, she's on drugs, she was a danger to herself. She came at him for no reason. She's crazy, I'm telling you, officer. These men as are accomplished at grooming witnesses as they are at grooming victims.

And then the officer encounters a woman (last week one officer literally described a victim as "hysterical" in a police report), who is freaking out with the aftermath of a traumatic violent attack, who may have behaved in a way she thought she would never behave, who is crying and asking for her child and maybe not cooperating (bad) or maybe telling the police the truth (more common, even worse).

Because the women that these men target have only one trait in common: kindness. The ability to take responsibility for their actions and give grace to another. That's the only thing these men need to take advantage of them.

Calm man with reasonable explanation with whom the police officer has much in common... "hysterical" woman. Obviously she was the primary aggressor, because now we know that men can be abused too.

Now she's got assault charges. Maybe they'll even stick. Because assault and battery is not the concerning part of abusive behavior. Committing assault and battery is also a symptom of being abused. This conviction will deny her access to the paltry, bullshit, meager domestic violence services we have on offer, and might cause her to be evicted from housing or fired from her job. She could lose custody of the children to her attacker, and he most certainly will file for custody, because that's part of coercive control.

In Summary:

Mandatory arrest laws for domestic violence are garbage. They produce garbage. They perpetuate the cycle because they buy into the myths that abusers, men in particular, have perpetuated about themselves for much longer than those laws have existed.

And, as a final note, regarding abuse of men and abuse in same-sex relationships: while I have seen the results of this kind of abuse as well, the violence of abuse of men is nearly always confined to humiliations, slaps and shoves (NOT OKAY, to be clear, and this is not an absolute rule, my god the very few exceptions in my career have been horrific) and the violence of the abuse of women is strangulation, broken bones, stab wounds, and much much worse constant sexual violence. Male violence against women is unrelenting. It's not a problem of reporting. Space for survivors MUST include men, MUST include the lgbtq+ community, MUST include women, in order for us all to be safe, but any discussion of abuse is simply incomplete without acknowledging this reality.

[uplatescroller]

it should be illegal for a company to be able to brick any console that you legally own I am so serious about this

[uplatescroller]

i feel like we dont point out that its christian doctrine that god thinks we all deserve to burn for eternity for the crime of being born and the only way he'd forgive us is if we completely and utterly devote our lives to him. what a fucking prick.

[uplatescroller]

i feel like we dont point out that its christian doctrine that god thinks we all deserve to burn for eternity for the crime of being born and the only way he'd forgive us is if we completely and utterly devote our lives to him. what a fucking prick.

[uplatescroller]

[uplatescroller]

[uplatescroller]

"If you're not american, why do you even care-"

US-based company YouTube just nuked the government funded channel for HIV prevention in Germany. The channel is purely educational and had no prior (or current) violations.

Assuming you guys get elections again; if I see a single person telling non-US-americans to stay out of it, it's on sight.

(german source) As of writing, the channel has been reinstated due to public backlash, but is missing several videos.

[uplatescroller]

Reset the clock :(

[uplatescroller]

i love this website i just feel at home here you know

[uplatescroller]

ok time to lock the fuck in *opens discord* ok time to lock the fuck in *opens tumblr* ok time to lock the fuck in *opens gmail* ok time to lock the fuck in *opens youtube* ok time to lock the fuck in *opens an unstable vortex in time and space* ok time to lock the fuck in *opens ao3* ok time to lock the fuck in *opens discord* ok time to lock the fuck in *opens tumblr*

[uplatescroller]

you guys are so annoying. why do i have to see discourse every year that's like "was tolkien really a woke king or was he your conservative uncle?" the guy was a devout catholic and a genteel misogynist who maintained lifelong friendships with queer people and women, and this isn't even paradoxical because that was part of the upper-class oxford culture he was immersed in. tolkien told the nazis to fuck off (and in doing so demonstrated a real understanding of what racism is and why it's harmful, beyond simply "these guys are bad news because they're who my country is at war with right now") but his inner life was marked by internalized racism that is deeply and inextricably woven into the art that he made. he foolishly described himself as an anarcho-monarchist, and it's kind of crazy to see people on this website passionately arguing that he likely never meaningfully engaged with anarchist theory, because...yeah, no shit, of course he didn't. tolkien didn't have to engage with most sociopolitical theory because as an upper-class englishman of his position, he was never affected by any of the issues that this theory is concerned with. what is plainly obvious from reading both his fiction and letters is that tolkien's ideal political system was that the divinely ordained god-king would rise up and rule in perfect justice and humility; he didn't want a government, he wanted a king arthur, even though (obviously) he was aware that outcome was impossible. why is it so hard for people to accept that he was just some guy! his letters aren't a code you have to crack. no amount of arguing or tumblr-level analysis is going to one day reveal a rhetorically airtight internally consistent worldview spanning jrrt's fiction, academic work, and personal writings, thereby "solving" the question of whether he was a woke king or your conservative uncle. his ideology was extremely inconsistent because, at the end of the day, he was just some guy.

[uplatescroller]

Ban porn ban everything idgaf. Literally ban t shirts with slogans on them. Ban colours that are sufficiently uncommon in nature as to be jarring to look at. Ban "fit checks." Ban use of the internet that couldn't be described as scholarly unless you have a mental health diagnosis (damage already done.) Ban me. Send me away. I want to see it all burnnnn

[uplatescroller]

Okay so just to sum up recent events on the US Right:

• Trump starts a contract with Peter Thiel's Palantir company to create a database of ALL INFORMATION on EVERY LIVING AMERICAN

• Its revealed Stephen Miller and Elon Musk have had a very massive fight, supposedly because Elon Musk is sleeping with Miller's wife

• Trump ousts Elon from the administration, after over five months of being besties. Leaves with Stephen Miller's wife, who he just hired at one of his companies (!?)

• Elon starts saying the Big Beautiful Bill sucks

• A GOP Representative reveals that most of them didnt actually get to read the Big Beautiful Bill, GOP leadership basically made them rubber stamp it and they are pissed to find out it makes them all look horrible. A lot of them are now discussing a shakeup in GOP leadership.

• Trump says Elon has "Trump Derangement Syndrome" (🤮)

• Elon escalates massively, stating that Trump is in the Epstein files and THATS why they havent released them yet

• This comes right as Alex Jones loses a massive chunk of his audience because he's endorsing Trump's Palantir contract, and his fans are basically all very concerned about their privacy. They want a new conspiracy to follow and they just got one

• Trump starts threatening Elon's government contracts

• Ian Miles Cheong calls for Trump to be impeached immediately, and for JD Vance to become President. Elon Musk quote retweets this with "Yes"

• JD Vance was mentored by Peter Thiel

• Steve Bannon takes to Fox calling for the immediate deportation of Musk, and making SpaceX a public company

[uplatescroller]

big plans on the dash

[uplatescroller]

honestly i never thought the phrase “i want that twink obliterated” was like a sexual thing. like when i read the phrase i imagine “a meteor like the one that killed the dinosaurs is summoned from the heavens and hits the twink in question” type situation