((A HTTYD roleplay and appreciation blog.))
The top 10 highest-grossing films of all time. (As of April 21, 2014.)
((l AYS DOWN.))
"Uh, oh, thanks for the, um, bouquet?" The violet didn’t exactly hold well next to the sunflower. It was a strange mixture, but more confusing than anything. "Is there something I’m missing here?"
"A flower? Um, thanks." Hiccup twirled the little plant between his fingers. "Is there a reason or…"
Government is good.
Big Brother is watching you.
The State wants to take care of you.
north Korea scares me to death. the fact that a place like that still exists in modern day. those people are prisoners.
these don’t even cover half of how many f-d up things are going on in north korea
Toothless is just about to get ready to teach that lil punk a lesson…xD
Why are sjws always so cryptic and accusatory instead of educational and clear.
Because they don’t actually want to educate.
Thank you. This is exactly it. If people bothered to take the time to explain instead of just festering hatred… Most of the time, people are reacting to “offenses” caused by a person’s malice-free ignorance, which isn’t a crime and certainly isn’t intended as an offense. As a result, it is much harder for people to take a cause seriously when the reaction against any mishap - no matter how small - is a chain of uncreative, incoherent insults.
Um, I feel like I’ve just got to say something, and I hope I don’t get this wrong…
Am I the only one who did not perceive the ask avannak received as malicious or aggressive?
The ask said simply that not everyone who gets a period identifies as a woman, and not everyone who identifies as a woman gets a period. Now, logically there are many people of the female sex who don’t get periods for various health reasons (my old roommate didn’t have any for at least several months and she wasn’t pregnant, anyone who gets a hysterectomy won’t have one), but from the previous part of the statement, we can assume they are referring to trans* people. (I hope that’s the right term, but I’m not exactly knowledgeable about this and it is an issue still under much contention so idk if an overall proper term has even been decided.)
The message ended with “js” which I assume meant “just saying.” And that’s how I took it. There’s a good chance they used anon to say it because aside from avannak being intimidating, trans* issues can be a touchy topic. So what we have with that ask was someone pointing out that the term “women” in the discussion was excluding trans* people.
Now, this is a deeply female topic. Periods only affect people of the female sex. For most people, the term “women” is perfectly natural to use under those circumstances, and I agree that there are better instances to bring up ignorance or neglect (willful or accidental) of the trans* community.
But look at it from the anon’s side. Obviously, either they are or know someone who is trans* or it is a topic that is important to them for one reason or another. Important enough to step up and say something and I’ll repeat that I felt no malice from that ask. It could have been malicious or bitter, but I don’t think it deserve the reaction it is getting when the wording is so ambiguous. Can any of you tell me you haven’t said something that came across wrong because you were nervous? I’ve done that probably every day of my life. Trans* and other topics of sex, gender and sexuality are often poorly received, so even if someone has not been on the receiving end of malicious or ignorant responses to a comment about trans* issues, they could reasonably be very wary of the possibility. Avannak has shown acceptance of various sexualities, but she has never really touched on trans* topics, so the anon could not know what her stance on the issue might be.
I’ve digressed, back to anon’s possible viewpoint. While most people would think nothing of using the word “women” in a discussion about periods, the term as it is currently understood does not include trans* people. Frankly, we don’t have any easy, wide spread terms that include people born woman and people who later decide they are a woman aside from phrases like “people with uteri” (which is apparently the proper plural term), which comes across as odd or unnecessary to people with little to no knowledge of trans* issues. Even people familiar with the concept of trans* may stop at that kind of wording. However, inclusion and visibility are very important to trans* people and their allies along with the rest of the LGBTQA+ or whatever it is now community. That anon ask was a reminder that “women,” people who are born of the female sex, are not the only people who deal with periods and while the discussion had no intention of trans* erasure, it was an opportunity to mention it to spread awareness. Exactly what needed to be explained in this case? Everyone understood immediately that the anon was talking about trans* people, right? Then, rather, I suppose the reason it was important to anon to bring that up within that discussion? That would be harder to understand, but from what I can tell it was that the term “women’ excluded trans* people and they would appreciate being included/their existence being acknowledged. It was important because that is a struggle that they face, so while it may seem like nothing to us, it hit a nerve for them.
Really, this is an issue far beyond the discussion that was being had, but this reaction to it is out of place as well. True, there are plenty of people screaming obscenities in the name of social justice and for you all apparently this was a good chance to jump up and say something about that — just like the way the anon found this a good opportunity to bring up an issue important to them.
People who use social justice as an excuse for being angry and hateful towards others are wrong. But it’s impossible to tell whether that anon meant to be malicious or simply wanted to raise awareness of this matter because the wording allows for either tone.
This is way, way too long, and I don’t know why I felt I had to say so much, but… don’t look down on people for speaking up about what is important to them. Yes, many people are not actually trying to educate or raise awareness on an issue, but many other people are. There are also those who are just too immature to know how to do it right, and I don’t know that gossiping like this helps them. There are even people who simply become too passionate and misspeak or come across as maliciously aggressive when really they only mean to passionately further their cause.
Don’t jump to conclusions about an ambiguously worded anonymous message. Don’t talk about how people jump in “insult first, explain never” when the message was obviously clear enough (“hey please include trans* people”) and there were no insults nor accusatory language. It’s obvious at least some of you are thinking of other social justice airheads who have abused social issues to act hatefully, and I just hate to imagine what that anon must being thinking if they really didn’t mean any malice and yet are being labeled as a dreaded SJW. And if they did mean it bitterly or maliciously, way to go, I’m sure comments like those are exactly what is going to convince them to stop.
I know most of this discussion is aimed at the rude, hateful SJWs, but if that’s the case I don’t like seeing it associated with that particular anonymous message which was, as far as we can be certain, poorly worded. It just sends a misplaced, hurtful message to the anon and anyone else who reads this post and connects the inciting incident to the following discussion. It sends a message to the LGBTQA+ community, at least it’s more timid members, that they should never speak up, and might also incite the same hateful people you’re talking about rather than teaching them that their method is wrong and ultimately ineffective. There is a limit to looking down on people who send a message like that.
Augh, this is really long, but I hope I managed to get my point across. Everything that has been said is valid, but the association with a message that was NOT accusatory or insulting is hurtful and misleading. Saying it was cryptic is also a flat-out lie since everyone who has made a comment clearly understood that they were trying to include trans* people. Was that really necessary in that discussion? The people who have made the comments above clearly don’t think so, but I would argue that the anon and others in the trans* or LGTBQA+ community who deal with erasure and ignorance at every step find it very important to bring up the fact that they exist and that “man” and “woman” no longer work as blanket terms. Were they right to bring it up in that particular discussion on that particular blog? Personally, I would argue probably not. But treating that anon as a hateful SJW for sending that message is even more unnecessary.
(Having serious trouble reading all of this on mobile, the text keeps piling up)
I just want to make it clear — I think the anon’s message is completely silly because it’s so out of the point. Obviously I think gender identification has NOTHING to do with what was being talked of — the biological aspects of a femal body, of a person with a uterus, commonly referred to as a female. You cannot expect every single person to tend for EVERY SINGLE DAMN WORD they use in their daily speech just because some people prefer not to be associated with a gender.
If i refer to a human with a penis as a “man”, generally speaking, I think it’s just completely over-zealous to say, “hey not all people with dicks are dudes”. Like. Okay. Let them choose to be what they like. If they ask me to respect their gender, in specific, I will. But telling me that “a man has a penis” and “a woman has a uterus/vagina” is something of the sorts of a “common misconception” or of a misguided generalization, I will scoff in most cases. Because it really IS the usual norm and it is what I am always going to refer myself to, and if I have to make any exceptions I will, assuming I know when and how.
In this case, bringing up this issue is just…?????
Besides, everything in my language is gendered. it’s very hard to switch that off.
Though I gotta admit, the thought of being stuck in a body you can’t identify yourself with must be daunting. :( this doesn’t mean people are in the wrong for using the common biological terms.
Yes, I did agree that it was off-topic, but so is this whole discussion about hateful social justice workers. I agree that it’s too much to expect people to not say “man” and “woman” and other gendered terms because that is what is known to them and commonly accepted — but changing what terms are common and accepted is a goal to some members of the LGBTQA+ community.
My point, and I feel a bit weird saying all this because I’m not really an ally and I haven’t made any clear decisions on where I stand on this topic or many related issues (this is a tough issue for me for many reasons) — anyway, my point is that while it seems silly to many people, it is very serious to them. I can relate to being laughed at or looked down upon when bringing up a topic that was important and very serious to me, however tangent from the original discussion topic. Just because it’s not important to you or difficult to comprehend or seems just unnecessary does not mean that it is not important to someone else, and that was pretty much the point I wanted to make. Well, that became the main point after I looked at this post and was like “I didn’t sense any malice from that anon tho? ????”
frame studies of HTTYD (loosely reffed for the third)
I WORK AT A BUILD A BEAR AND I WALKED INTO WORK AND THEY WERE PLAYING TEST DRIVE AND AFTER IT ENDED THEY ANNOUNCED THE NEW TOOTHLESS PLUSHIE
"All little Vikings can make a daring dragon"
IM SOBBING ACTUALLY SOBBING