Polyamorous folks figure out REAL QUICK shit's so much easier if you just say it. "Hey, can you compliment me?" "Hey I want to do something special with you soon. Would you please schedule something for next week?" "I'm feeling really unloved, help me convince my brain its being dumb?"

If you can just duct tape over the voice in your head that says "its not real if you have to ask", long enough to get the words out, you could have it all, babe.

This is advice to everyone but especially cishet monogs

sincerely you do not have to kill the guilt. That sounds really difficult. You just have to not listen to the guilt (or whatever else) for the 10 seconds it takes to get the words out.

And 10 seconds is so easy. You can do anything for 10 measley seconds. That's so small and doable.

I needed "do it scared" but I'm starting to think y'all need "do it even if you feel guilty"

I fucking know I do. Why does asking have to be such a fight with myself?

Y'all should Google the article, it’s actually pretty neat. Basically, the Aldabra Atoll was once inhabited by the Aldabra Rail, a flightless species of bird that had diverged from the flying White-Throated Rail when a section of the population landed there and found they had no natural predators. However, the Atoll occasionally gets completely submerged, and all of the flightless Aldabra rails were wiped out. But then, after the Atoll re-emerged, a bunch of the EXACT SAME species of flying White Throated Rail decided to settle there again, and immediately proceeded to evolve into flightless birds AGAIN.

Witches On Tinder

Just the vocal delivery on its own is funny every time

speaking of halloween- if you don’t know what the fuck this is, i am begging you to educate yourself<3

happy october ! please rise for the anthem

Fun fact: This music video was released in July 1997. They had no obligation to make this in any way Halloween themed. The song probably isn’t on many Halloween playlists. But the Backstreet Boys wanted to do it this way, and had to fight the record label about it.

queer people on this site really make me feel like a confused straight guy at pride. the discourse here could kill a man

"why polyamorous people aren't valid" "mspec lesbians AREN'T okay actually" "aroallos are freaks" "he/him dni. cis men dni" "this post is for non-men only" yessss and the one with long hair goes in the girl box, then the one with short hair goes in the boy box!!

maybe I'm just a boring he/him white guy but inventing about 7 trillion terms to define "man" and "woman" so you can reinforce gender essentialism isn't very "love is love" of you. maybe i just don't have a sexuality but picking and choosing what sexualities are normal and which ones are "weird and predatory" sounds like we're all a bunch of republicans on fox news. if you attend your local pride parade and look REAAALLLYYY closely, you'll notice you can't actually tell if someone's gay or not from their appearance, and there's no way to know if they're "invading queer spaces". maybe it's just me, but when i attended my local gaybar last night for the drag show, they didn't ask for my gay-card with a peer reviewed diagnosis of faggot stamped on it. they just let me in the building. i live a life of bliss and luxury in not caring about any queer discourse ever, and just going "WHATEVER MAKES YOU HAPPY :-)" while booting up the latest cod game. and it seems much more fun than whatever the fuck you people are on about

muting my notifs for this post but i need to acknowledge this first. My favorite tags fr 🙏

every arrangement is edible if you're a goatgirl

i feel very strongly about this one, y'all. i love it

you bring your goat gf flowers. with tears in her eyes she says thank you, she loves them. you're starting to tell her how you remembered she said roses were her favorite aaaaand she's eating them

@sistercara you. you understand me. i love you

official goat post

I just want to remind people that it’s 2024 and we didn’t “go thru a pandemic” we are “going thru a pandemic” present tense. It is still happening. People are still get sick, still becoming disabled, and still dying. Covid hasn’t gone away and I beg people to not normalize getting sick with it.

people who study the wellbeing of children: you should provide people a living wage and PTO, and teach parents to stop yelling at and spanking their kids

people who claim to care a lot about kids: no I think it’s the phones

*tim curry voice* tesTOSterone

I'm starting a collection

and another

S1E6 - “Pride, Pomp and Circumstance”

Nonnatives were reblogging this without the caption. Keep it. Read it. Acknowledge it.

I finally made the meme I've had in my head for over a year

*slowly reaches for the popcorn*

Accurate

Inaccurate when I say I’m not very political it’s because I’m not. I’m a libertarian that leans conservative but politics bore me.

The next post on this dudes blog is about how women are naturally inferior

A libertarian who leans conservative is at least as bad, maybe worse.

He's conservative but trying to pretend he's not, just like the OP said.

Likewise if anyone says they're "fiscally conservative but socially liberal". You can't be both at the same time; in order to be socially liberal the government must be spending money on social support programs and infrastructure upgrades, which conservatives hate. "Fiscally conservative, socially liberal" just translates to "conservative but likes watching RuPaul".

Fiscal conservatism = austerity. Austerity = cutbacks on social security and infrastructure in order to save tax payers money.

Austerity more often than not negatively effects everyone who isn't upper middle class or better off and it destroys any upward mobility financially.

It impacts marginalized people most of all.

Furthermore, for those who don't think that's reason enough.... it doesn't actually Work.

It's comparable to trying to save money in your life by giving up the brushing of the teeth. The damage caused by the neglect will ultimately result in painful and expensive problems.

The same happens societally when social safety and infrastructure is neglected. When poor people become poorer, crime increases, because people in need will do desperate things when they're desperate. When upward mobility is restricted, crime increases, because when society tells you "you must be/do/have X to be worth something" while raising barriers between people and their ability to be/do/have X, people will stop obeying the rules to attain them. When healthcare becomes harder to access, people will become far more ill before they seek help, making preventable problems skyrocket. etc, etc, etc, etc, etc...

The roads are messed up? Cars break easier, people end up losing personal transport. Public transport neglected too? People stop being able to get to work. People stop being able to get to work? They lose jobs. Lose jobs? Lose homes. Lose homes? Desperation. Desperation? People will do whatever it takes to survive, either by disobeying the societal rules to obtain shelter, food, homes, or to find ways to leave reality via substance use etc. "fiscally conservative" is about government spending... and a government that does not spend enough money to take care of it's people creates and/or exacerbates these problems, and the cost of these problems is Always greater than taking care of our people.

Housing first, which is to simply give housing to homeless people, without demanding they prove it by being clean and sober or any such thing, not only genuinely works, it not only gets people off the streets and keeps them off the streets... it's Cheaper. Those that are fiscally conservative tend to oppose it none the less because it's not actually about the money itself, but about not spending money on those they don't believe should be given it. It's always about who "deserves" any quality of life.

It's just conservatism.

Similarly, when it comes to benefits. Those that are fiscally conservative are frequently concerned about benefit fraud, the idea that a person is getting f.ex. disability payments without being actually disabled. And so, they fully support spending money on investigating disability fraud, on trying to find the people who are cheating the system.

But here's the thing. Every single time we look into the actual cost-benefit analysis of chasing benefit fraud, we get the same answer. They sometimes get false positives, meaning a person who is disabled is stripped of their disability unjustly, and if that person is able to sue the expense of that lawsuit is high. They do sometimes find fraud, this is true, but it's incredibly rare. The amount of money spent to find the very rare fraud, and the cost of getting it wrong, is several orders of magnitude greater than the money that the fraud is costing the state.

Chasing benefit fraud costs the tax payer up to a hundred times more than just leaving it be.

It's cheaper, not just a little bit cheaper, but VASTLY cheaper, to not even bother.

But that's not the point. The "fiscally conservative" that claims they just want to make sure the government isn't spending too much money doesn't actually care what's cheaper. The point is to oppressively observe everything the disabled person does or does not do or have to make sure they're not one of those who don't "deserve" to get help.

It's all about who "deserves" it.

And the fiscally conservative may claim they're socially liberal, but that liberal thought only extends to the "good ones", you know? The ones that look correct, behave correct, sound correct. The ones that conform to their expectations. The ones that "deserve" it.

The good tokens.

Hana-Rawhiti Kareariki Maipi-Clarke, the youngest MP in Aotearoa, starts a haka to protest the first vote on a bill reinterpreting the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi

Goes insanely hard

To provide further context from what I understand the bill wanted to take the rights guaranteed to the Maori in said treaty and expand them to all New Zealand citizens. The issue with that is that it sort of defeats the point of the protections of the treaty.

The Treaty of Waitangi is not even that good of a treaty. But it is better than any treaty the Crown signed with indigenous peoples

And it absolutely was not meant to be

The treaty as written screws over Māori, and was written in Te Reo Māori and English with deliberately misleading translations to Te Reo Māori. I'm not an expert by any means, but basically the Te Reo Māori version has clauses that promise much more independence and sovereignty, while the English version does not

However

The English version promises them rights as Citizens

From what I remember from University 10+ years ago, this clause, this sentence, was added last minute by the writer of the treaty. Like, right before the big signing at Waitangi.

And the Crown was PISSED

Because now they had a legally binding document that promised, in their own language, to treat Māori with the same rights as they would English. Which was absolutely not the goal. The goal was to trick Māori into signing away their lands and that honestly still did happen. The treaty was not a good faith proposal by the Engliah.

But its still better than anyone else got, and it's better than no treaty. And because nowadays we can't just ignore the Te Reo Māori side of the treaty, the government's of the past few decades have been honouring Māori sovereignty, honouring their stewardship of the land, and undoing a lot of the bad faith "sales" or straight up stolen land.

Except our current fuck nuggets, who want to make Te Reo Māori an endangered language again, and steal back that land because they want to mine on it and sell it and they hate that Māori stewardship is so environmentally focused and not profit driven.

So, in a way, the current government is more true to the intentions of the Crown who initially came up with the treaty.

But since those guys were colonising bastards, I don't see "honouring" them as anything good.

Even with criticism of the treaty, without it, Māori would lose a lot of protections to their lands, their culture, their language, and as a country we would go backwards to a time when they were even more discriminated against

Toitū te tiriti

Uphold the treaty

"came back wrong" but it's food that you heated up in the microwave

OK SO

For anyone who hasn't heard my Microwave Rant:

Microwaves are designed to be used at a broad range of power levels. If you're getting bad results reheating your food, and you're doing everything on full blast, try a lower power setting! 50% power for twice the time, just give it a shot. It gives the heat time to spread evenly, and prevents overcooking of parts that are exposed to more radiation.

People complain about reheated pizza a lot -- that's bc overheating the crust makes it tough and chewy. I usually do pizza on 30% power for THREE times as long because it's especially vulnerable -- and my crust always comes out nice and tender.

I think there's a good metaphor for Came Back Wrong here too: if you actually take the time to do your necromantic ritual and/or unholy experiment right, and don't rush it at 100% power, you're likely to get better results.

Since reading this post and following its advice, my microwaved good comes out so much better.

Since reading this post a d following its advice, my necromantic rituals have come out so much better.

For microwave pizza specifically... try heating it up in a skillet instead, with a lid if you got it.

Medium heat, just a touch of oil, only long enough to heat through.

Your crust will be toasted and the flavours will be reawakened.

You can use the garlic oil for something even better.