meltingpotofinterests:

ryebreadgf:

(via seeyouguyslater)

autolenaphilia:

Farrell’s Fallacy

One of the most common forms of antifeminist arguments is something I’m now going to call Farrell’s Fallacy. I’ve discussed it before in this essay, but now I have a snappy name for it and what I said bears repeating. Farrell’s fallacy goes like this.

“Feminists say we live in a patriarchy and men have male privilege. But look at this group of men undeniably experiencing marginalization and oppression. Where is their male privilege? Checkmate, feminists!”

It’s named after Warren Farrell, “father of the men’s rights movement.” This is admittedly partly for alliterative reasons, but also because he used an early version of it in his 1993 book The Myth of Male Power, where he used the fact that working class men are exploited by capitalism and are drafted to die in wars to argue that, well, male power is a myth and in fact “men are the disposable sex.”

Yet you can substitute any group of marginalized men in the argument, and the argument is pretty much the same. The “group of men undeniably experiencing marginalization and oppression” can be non-white men, disabled men, gay men, trans men, and so on, sometimes all of them at once. It’s therefore very popular here on tumblr as a way to sell antifeminism to social justice people who have a poor grasp of feminist theory, because it appeals to their understandable desire to support marginalized groups.

And it is a fallacy, because it relies on a strawman. It presumes feminists are doing the most simplistic analysis possible of patriarchy and male privilege, where only gender is taken into account and complicating factors like class and race are ignored. In reality intersectionality has been an important part of feminist analysis for over 30 years.

And while Farrell’s Fallacy uses real oppression as part of its argument, it dishonestly contextualizes that oppression. It ignores that the oppression is not on the basis of these men’s gender, but on other factors. These men are oppressed, yes, but it’s because of systemic injustices based on class, race, disability and queerness and so on.

This often means their male privilege is severely curtailed, but it doesn’t remove it. Women also suffer from these forms of oppression and they are often worse for women because they often intersect with the misogyny of patriarchal society, which is why we have terms like misogynynoir, lesbophobia and transmisogyny. It is in comparison with similarly marginalized women that we can see the male privilege of marginalized men.

This is one of the most common antifeminist arguments, especially here on tumblr. And i hope this post helps you recognize it for the nonsese it is.

(via heedra)

localvoidcat:

i can’t be trusted with sour gummies i’m guzzling this shit down like a hog that’s tasted blood

(via seeyouguyslater)

arknights-archive:

Stormwatch stickers 2/2

(via seeyouguyslater)

utopians:

utopians:

Let’s all just get fucking real and rewatch the handmaiden okay

“gay people deserve stupid corny badly written fluff just like straight people have!!!!” no we don’t. we’re watching the handmaiden

(via windienine)

monstertief:

So, anyone who follows me knows I was laid off back in January and basically have had no luck finding a job in the last seven months

With a lot of help from my best friend, I’ve managed to keep things together, but a lot of things have gone wrong this past month especially, so I’m in a position where I will have to ask for outside help.

If anyone can spare any amount, my PayPal is here and if you can’t, I totally understand. A reblog would be helpful as well if you feel comfortable doing so.

Thanks in advance, everyone.

(via monstertief)

calamitys-child:

Adhd will have you too burnt out to eat or shower but give you the hubris to decide you can homebrew an entire d&d system on the back of a receipt

(via butch-king-frankenstein)

xx-ghost-rat-xx:

so proud of my little sister. shes only in kindergarten but shes already smoking weed at a second-grade level.

(via abyssalcunters)

retroactivebakeries:

iolithae septimian is crashing in the strategistgirls’ apartment and she is simply refusing to leave…they keep trying to scooch her out the door with some funny little tricks of Eide but she just keeps quoting dril tweets at them

(via geostatonary)

hairasuntouchedaspartoftheamazon:

batsarebetterthanpeople:

batsarebetterthanpeople:

here’s my hot take about my generation and people younger than me (I’m 22 years old)

The reason current teenagers and people in their really early 20s are conservative on accident and have such shitty takes on the internet is because our generation was much more sheltered than previous generations and because we were raised to be ok with orwellian servailence and that is 100% the fault of our parents, Reagan Era kidnapping panics, and the rise of technology all coming together to prevent us from doing the sketchy shit that sends parents into panic mode but which is also completely fundemental to childhood development. If your parents had even a crumb of money to their name and even a shred of free time they started tracking your phone as soon as it was possible to. I did not experience this because my parents are actively trying to live like it’s the 1990s and still have not gotten cell phones of their own, and did not let me have one until I was 18 years old and it was no longer their choice, but literally over half of my friends in middle and high school had their phones tracked by their parents at some point or other, and we would occasionally find this out, not because their parents told them, but when we were trying to do the aforementioned sketchy shit and their parent’s car would pull up. And I would, like a reasonable person after finding this out, encourage my friends to just leave their phones at home, and their response would be “What if I get kidnapped” or “My parents are just trying to keep me safe”

This in my estimation has lead to a combination of kids being terminally online because they do have internet access and are better at deleting search history than their parents think they are, but don’t have the freedom to go out and do shit without their parents’ knowledge or consent, so they have the most privacy from the people who control their lives while they’re on the internet, and kids not having the real world experiences they should have, not knowing how to connect with other people irl, not feeling comfortable leaving the house because of the horror story lies their parents told them to make them ok with the surveillance they were inflicting on their kids. Kids these days are growing up in the fucking panopticon when they should be out in the woods playing with knives or stealing cigarettes from their older sibling and going out to an empty parking lot to smoke them or whatever and that shit is sticking with them into adulthood. Things that were “tee hee we could get in trouble isn’t this so fun and daring” in the 1990s and 2000s have become in the 2010s and 2020s things that are “If I do that without texting my parents some sort of lie to excuse where my location is my parent’s car will pull up and I will get grounded for the next two weeks.”

Like even when I was 19 I had a 16 year old friend who would volunteer their time at a food shelf and that’s how we knew each other. We would talk about dungeons and dragons together, and the game store was 4 blocks from the food shelf. One day we left the food shelf earlier than they had told their parents they would and they got punished for that. We were literally just going to look at dungeons and dragons miniatures and dice, which was self evident if you could see where we started and how far we walked and where too. I have to assume that this isn’t uncommon. It’s wrong, but it’s not uncommon.

Ok it has become apparent to me that people do not understand what I mean by conservative on accident.

Nobody my age is voting republican. Let’s be clear on that. With the exception of a small minority of gamer gaters and people who were raised in actual cults most people my age are either commies or good liberals who votes straight blue down the ticket. This is because of the greta thunberg effect. We’re all afraid of dying of thirst because there’s no water anymore at the age of 35. Wealthy white children are no longer safe with the republican party which has become less of a political party and more of a death cult, and white children are less wealthy than they used to be (I specify white because POC by in large never voted for the party of the southern strategy for obvious reasons). We as a generation are so insanely blue that they’re trying to raise the voting age to 25 about it.

This liberalism and party affiliation doesn’t preclude them from being conservative on accident. What I mean by that is… Well

No kink at pride is a great example. The assumption that pride should exist at all makes them think that they’re immune to conservative logic but they’re still trying to enforce a dominant ideology onto a minority group. That person who made the tweet about how you shouldn’t have sex in houses where there are children in the other room and if you can’t avoid it you’re a sex addict. That’s a great example of like straight up puritanism coming out of the mouth of someone who proports themselves to be a leftist

If you ever see a discourse that feels like an obvious psyop as an adult and you can’t understand why these supposed leftist youths are falling for it it’s because that kid has never had sex in the woods and had to try to buy plan b under their parent’s nose. My generation is dumb about sex. We’re dumb about drugs. We’re dumb about theft. We moralize literally everything. We’re so dumb about stranger danger that we never learned how to community organize so while the vast vast majority of us are crushed by existential dread about debt and climate change but we never do anything about it because we just don’t know how to organize because we’re raised to see everyone else as a threat and we never went to or organized parties as teens because our parents would always know and stop us.

They managed to invent a generation that hates capitalism but fully buys into individualism and who is supportive of queer people and way less monogamous than previous generations but who still buys into the base assumptions of the nuclear family and thinks sex is evil. The levels of politics going on here are way weirder and stupider and more complicated than “young people vote republican and watch Fox news”

I’ve never seen anybody explain it so well

(via thebombasticbooky)

prokopetz:

The Gremlin Game Designer’s Creed

1. Rules are toys, and the process of rules-mediated play consists of smashing their faces together like little girls making their Barbies make out. Unless a rules module is explicitly intended to be enacted solo, it should present a generous surface area for other rules to bite into. The most elegantly self-contained piece of rules design is, collaboratively speaking, also the most useless.
   
2. The principal function of “player characters” as discrete collections of mechanical traits is to furnish each player with an assemblage of shiny things to show off to other players. Mechanical abstraction is well and good, but if you abstract away the act of curating one’s collection of shinies, player engagement will suffer.
   
3. The GM, if present, is a fellow player. Ensure that they have their own toys and shinies to play with. The failure of a game to provide these is often a major contributor to why nobody wants to run it!
   
4. The most effective way of encouraging players to do what you want is to make a number go up. This applies to both to rewards and to misfortunes; a number counting up to disaster a much more visceral motivator than a number counting down to zero.
   
5. Crunch is good. The defining feature of tabletop roleplaying is that rules produce stories. The act of interpreting the outputs of the rules and the act of telling the game’s story are the same activity. Be mindful of what kinds of stories your rules want to tell; you may find that their opinion on the matter differs from your own!
   
6. Actually assembling your game’s rules is as much a process of discovery as it is of invention. In the course of designing and playtesting, you may find that your own game has rules that you didn’t know about. Where did they come from? It is a mystery.
   
7. Randomised outcomes should be made mandatory with care and restraint; randomised outcomes should be made available with delirious abandon. As far as is practicable, players should always have the option of asking the dice what unhinged bullshit should happen next. Corollary: lookup tables are your friend.
   
8. Players don’t need your permission to depart from the rules as written; granting it is arrogant. By the same token, however, it should never be unclear to players whether they’re departing from the rules as written. Let the thought process behind what you’re writing hang out for all the world to see; folks will be rummaging in the game’s guts anyway, so give them easy access.
   
9. If your game has a default setting, explain it as little as possible, but always let the rules and presentation reflect it. Seeing an entry for “poorly made dwarf” in a table of player character backgrounds will fire a group’s imagination more strongly in three words than a chapter stuffed with worldbuilding lore could in ten thousand.
   
10. You don’t need to be good at naming things as long as you’re good at puns. Wordplay, alliteration and rhyme may also serve in this capacity, as, in a pinch, may a well placed dick joke.

(via laenan)

memorycycle:

horses going to the locker rooms after a harrowing battle in which their riders all died from spears to the head and theyre like whipping eachother playfully with the towels and squirting water at eachother

(via thebombasticbooky)

stormclouds-chainmail:

escaping-amish:

I love how he finds the words to describe the concepts that float around my head daily ❤️❤️❤️❤️ love him!

[Video description: a Tiktok video by @AbrahamPiper

Transcript: if you’re leaving fundamentalism right now especially if you’re young and you don’t know what to say to your parents here’s something that might be helpful. On threads yesterday IAmTransLOL said this about deconverting, “I woke up one day and realised I no longer believed any of it and didn’t care enough to really examine why.” At first that might sound flighty, but it’s not. The option to not examine why is an important freedom when you’re leaving fundamentalism, because that obligation, the obligation to fully explain yourself that’s from them. That pressure to adequately list the reasons why you’re Houdiniing out of the chains of conservative Christianity is one of the chains. It’s a trap. They want a heartfelt explanation why you’re quitting. That’s actually fair. But then they will invariably reject it. Not fair. They hope that you fresh apostates will explain yourselves, not so that they can understand you better, but so that when your performance doesn’t convince them, you will question yourself. There’s no winning. And when there’s no winning, you gotta quit the game. Then when we quit, the people who are still playing will say that we forfeited and if you forfeit you lose. We’re losers. Okay. I’ve met a bunch of us losers, we’re a nice enough bunch. Here’s my point. There is no obligation to leave conservative Christianity in a way that takes it seriously. You can, but you don’t have to. You don’t have to leave fundamentalism in a way that people who are not leaving would approve of. That doesn’t make any sense. They’ll never approve so following their guidelines isn’t gonna work. If you’re rejecting their rules, great. Reject the last one too, which is that you have to quit by their standards. Quit by your standards and then don’t waste your time trying to make it sound good to them. I’m sorry, anyway, thanks for watching. If you like language videos interspersed by encouragement to disappoint your parents, come along, I got more.

End description]

(via xxxdragonfucker69xxx)

Anonymous asked:

✨ A game I wish more people were talking about.

indiepressrevolution:

Blood Feud is a game about honor, power and toxic masculinity in pre-christian Scandinavia.

There’s lots of clever mechanics in the game, for it being GM-less there’s certainly enough stuff for players to improv off of. One of the best, in my opinion, is having the player who’s setting the current scene declare what their intention is for the scene, what they want to get out of it.

However my favorite mechanic is the women. In Blood Feud, all your player characters are men, but each scene must include at least one woman npc. In fact, if there are no women present, the scene ends. And at the end of each scene, the players who played women decide which of the men was the most unmanly. That man then loses one honor, part of the games token system.

This doesn’t necessarily mean that the women will decide the person who was being the least traditionally masculine was being the most unmanly, but it does mean that during each scene every male character will have that thought in the back of their mind. They’re being watched, their performances are being judged, there is a tactile thing to be won or lost.

It’s a fairly good metaphor, in my opinion, and if nothing else it gets you thinking, which is the purpose of the game.

I think the games description puts it best: “This is a game about people being nasty to each other and about figuring out why.”

Indie TTRPG Hype Ask Game

welovethesedogs:

th3_s3nsitiv3_snack3r: just burst into tears after learning my preferred brand of onion dip would no longer be sold (╥ _ ╥)… but later felt true, human joy when i tasted the newest flavor sour of gummy bears (,,> ᴗ <,,) just another day in the life of me, the sensitive snacker

(via xxxdragonfucker69xxx)