🔥 | Latest

Ironic: NEW EPISODE CN CARTOETw I WAS TERRIBLE TO YOU. I LIKED TAKING EVERYTHING OUT ON YO.. beta-kindergarten: Because this is, for whatever reason being discussed again in the tags, here’s just another reminder to everyone, and especially to my fellow survivors who see themselves in Jasper: SU has /never/ been ambiguous regarding who was in control of malachite. It was undoubtedly Lapis up until SWI, and even then you could say she and Jasper were working together to fight the CGs. Abuse by definition NEEDS to have a power imbalance between the victim and abuser. Jasper was never allowed that power, while Lapis is always described as the one who was in control, therefore Lapis was the abuser and Jasper was the victim. Victims aren’t always good people. Jasper is very much a victim of circumstance, both from the war and from Malachite. Yes, she’s abusive, but towards the corrupted gems, and has yet to be given a chance to unlearn her toxic behaviors. She’s a messy victim, she’s aggressive and angry, and there are so many survivors who act like this; and guess what, they’re still victims. Having “ugly” symptoms and feeling affection for your abuser does NOT make you the abuser of the relationship. It doesn’t undermine your abuse and certainly doesn’t justify it, no matter what vitriol this fandom tries to spew at you because you see Jasper as the victim. Abusers aren’t always going to be your enemy. They aren’t always going to be bigger than you, or physically stronger. They can be friends or family or “beach summer fun buddies”. They can be nice sometimes and absolutely terrible other times. And they can also have traumas of their own. This doesn’t change or excuse the fact that they’re abusive. Lapis is this kind of abuser. She was the one holding the chains, the one who acknowledges her own power (and fears being placed in positions of control because of it), and the one who regrets her decisions and is trying to stop being abusive. Frankly I don’t care about protagonist centered morality enough to even consider Steven’s point of view regarding Malachite. I don’t care what the CGs in the show have to say about the situation because regardless of how much of a “terrible” person Jasper is, it’s presented clearly to us who was the one being held in chains against their will. I also cannot be bothered to care about your definitions of “lashing out” or, “self-blaming”. Lapis made her intentions painfully clear that this was for revenge and wanting to take out everything on someone. She doesn’t love the earth nor does she want to play nice with the CGs. So don’t even try to tell me this because I’m frankly just /tired/ of being reminded that you people don’t actually care about victims if our behaviors or coping mechanisms are “wrong” to you. Also, of the 2 years that I’ve been involved in this hell fandom I’ve yet to see Jasper fans attack the inboxes or posts of Lapis fans to the same extent that the reverse has been done. Jasper fans don’t spread ugly rumors about Rebecca Sugar’s abuse history either, so it’s pretty ironic that WE’RE the ones who condone abuse isn’t it? tl;dr: You’re honestly disgusting if you’ve EVER tried to make a victim feel bad for liking Jasper, and I sincerely hope you grow up some day and learn that it’s not worth it to harm real people and survivors for the sake of a cartoon. And if you’re a victim who relates to Jasper, believe me when I say you aren’t alone and you aren’t a bad person. Keep doing you. ✌️
Ironic: NEW EPISODE
 CN
 CARTOETw

 I WAS TERRIBLE TO YOU.

 I LIKED TAKING EVERYTHING OUT ON YO..
beta-kindergarten:

Because this is, for whatever reason being discussed again in the tags, here’s just another reminder to everyone, and especially to my fellow survivors who see themselves in Jasper:

SU has /never/ been ambiguous regarding who was in control of malachite. It was undoubtedly Lapis up until SWI, and even then you could say she and Jasper were working together to fight the CGs. Abuse by definition NEEDS to have a power imbalance between the victim and abuser. Jasper was never allowed that power, while Lapis is always described as the one who was in control, therefore Lapis was the abuser and Jasper was the victim.

Victims aren’t always good people. Jasper is very much a victim of circumstance, both from the war and from Malachite. Yes, she’s abusive, but towards the corrupted gems, and has yet to be given a chance to unlearn her toxic behaviors. She’s a messy victim, she’s aggressive and angry, and there are so many survivors who act like this; and guess what, they’re still victims. Having “ugly” symptoms and feeling affection for your abuser does NOT make you the abuser of the relationship. It doesn’t undermine your abuse and certainly doesn’t justify it, no matter what vitriol this fandom tries to spew at you because you see Jasper as the victim.

Abusers aren’t always going to be your enemy. They aren’t always going to be bigger than you, or physically stronger. They can be friends or family or “beach summer fun buddies”. They can be nice sometimes and absolutely terrible other times. And they can also have traumas of their own. This doesn’t change or excuse the fact that they’re abusive. Lapis is this kind of abuser. She was the one holding the chains, the one who acknowledges her own power (and fears being placed in positions of control because of it), and the one who regrets her decisions and is trying to stop being abusive. 

Frankly I don’t care about protagonist centered morality enough to even consider Steven’s point of view regarding Malachite. I don’t care what the CGs in the show have to say about the situation because regardless of how much of a “terrible” person Jasper is, it’s presented clearly to us who was the one being held in chains against their will. I also cannot be bothered to care about your definitions of “lashing out” or, “self-blaming”. Lapis made her intentions painfully clear that this was for revenge and wanting to take out everything on someone. She doesn’t love the earth nor does she want to play nice with the CGs. So don’t even try to tell me this because I’m frankly just /tired/ of being reminded that you people don’t actually care about victims if our behaviors or coping mechanisms are “wrong” to you. 

Also, of the 2 years that I’ve been involved in this hell fandom I’ve yet to see Jasper fans attack the inboxes or posts of Lapis fans to the same extent that the reverse has been done. Jasper fans don’t spread ugly rumors about Rebecca Sugar’s abuse history either, so it’s pretty ironic that WE’RE the ones who condone abuse isn’t it?

tl;dr: You’re honestly disgusting if you’ve EVER tried to make a victim feel bad for liking Jasper, and I sincerely hope you grow up some day and learn that it’s not worth it to harm real people and survivors for the sake of a cartoon. And if you’re a victim who relates to Jasper, believe me when I say you aren’t alone and you aren’t a bad person. Keep doing you. ✌️

beta-kindergarten: Because this is, for whatever reason being discussed again in the tags, here’s just another reminder to everyone, and...

Ironic: TYPOGRAPHICAL TONE OF VOICE 145 when did tumblr collectively decide not to use unctuation like when did this happen why is this a thing it iust looks so smooth I mean look at this sentence flow like a jungle river The popularity of this and similar posts both confirms that the describing a phenomenon widely recognized by fellow posters were neers and helped acculturate new users into the norms of the plat- form, such as signaling that a question is rhetorical or ironic by ask- ing it without a question mark. Ruhl cites another self-referential, widely shared, multiauthored post, this time from 2016. At first glance, it seems like it's primarily emphasis, but those examples example of different kinds of an interspersed in a neutral, minimal- are ist carrier sentence: i think it's really Cool how there are so many ways to express emphasis Completely different it's #wild TM on tumblr and they're all. #EmphasisTM WHAT HAVE YOU DONE The hashtagged, initial-capped, space-stretched, trademarked HEmphasisTM is a break in the system: it's got too many things ng on at once to be interpretable as more than a joke. But the reply all-capped WHAT HAVE YOU DONE, is simultaneously emphatic and minimalist: it signals strong feeling from the all caps and a rhe- torical question from the question syntax without a question mark. lumblr users were pography, but it wasn't just a Tumblr thing: it also started flourishing particularly self-reflexive about minimalist ty- allthingslinguistic: hi hello alert so that classic tumblr flowing jungle river post is now cited in a real book like an actual paper book and it’s called because internet and it’s all about the evolution of internet language and how TUMBLR DID THE THING and you can get it here
Ironic: TYPOGRAPHICAL TONE OF VOICE 145
 when did tumblr collectively decide not to use
 unctuation like when did this happen why is
 this a thing
 it iust looks so smooth I mean look at
 this sentence flow like a jungle river
 The popularity of this and similar posts both confirms that the
 describing a phenomenon widely recognized by fellow
 posters were
 neers and helped acculturate new users into the norms of the plat-
 form, such as signaling that a question is rhetorical or ironic by ask-
 ing it without a question mark. Ruhl cites another self-referential,
 widely shared, multiauthored post, this time from 2016. At first
 glance, it seems like it's primarily
 emphasis, but those examples
 example of different kinds of
 an
 interspersed in a neutral, minimal-
 are
 ist carrier sentence:
 i think it's really Cool how there are so many ways
 to express emphasis
 Completely different it's #wild
 TM on tumblr and they're all.
 #EmphasisTM
 WHAT HAVE YOU DONE
 The hashtagged, initial-capped, space-stretched, trademarked
 HEmphasisTM is a break in the system: it's got too many things
 ng on at once to be interpretable
 as more than a joke. But the reply
 all-capped WHAT HAVE YOU DONE, is simultaneously emphatic
 and minimalist: it signals strong feeling from the all caps and a rhe-
 torical question from the question syntax without a question mark.
 lumblr users were
 pography, but it wasn't just a Tumblr thing: it also started flourishing
 particularly self-reflexive about minimalist ty-
allthingslinguistic:

hi hello alert so that classic tumblr flowing jungle river post is now cited in a real book like an actual paper book and it’s called because internet and it’s all about the evolution of internet language and how TUMBLR DID THE THING and you can get it here

allthingslinguistic: hi hello alert so that classic tumblr flowing jungle river post is now cited in a real book like an actual paper bo...

Ironic: DAPASTOR YOO uncleromeo: feet-man-ahhh-sucker-of-the-toes: emotionsclashagainstemotions: thatpettyblackgirl: Because we know they value the lives of dogs over blac… nevermind 😒 the ironic part is, racism is probably why the cop was so convinced the drugs were there. the dog was doing its job, which is not reacting to drugs that don’t exist. the cop, on other hand, saw a black man, and was sure he had drugs. Drug dogs have also been found to be ineffective in many cases, basing their reactions on the cop’s body language. “For the purpose of this post, though, I want to focus on what’s missing from Colb’s analysis and, should the Supreme Court decide to hear the case, will almost certainly also be missing from oral arguments, the court’s ruling and most discussion of the case: that narcotics-detecting dogs and their handlers aren’t very good at discerning the presence of illegal drugs. Multiple analyses of drug-dog alerts have consistently shown alarmingly high error rates — with some close to and exceeding 50 percent. In effect, some of these K-9 units are worse than a coin flip. For some units, the reason may be sinister — the police handler may have trained the dog to alert on command. I’ve asked dog trainers to look at videos of roadside searches in the past, and, on more than one occasion, they said they saw clear indications that a dog was being cued to alert. But it needn’t be so malicious. While dogs are indeed capable of sniffing out illicit drugs, we’ve bred into them another overriding trait: the desire to please. Even drug dogs with conscientious handlers will read their handlers’ unintentional body language and alert accordingly. A 2010 study found that packages designed to trick handlers into thinking there were drugs inside them were much more likely to trigger false alerts than packages designed to trick the dogs. (Police-dog handlers and trainers responded to that study by refusing to cooperate with further research.) Many drug dogs, then, are not alerting to the presence of drugs, but to their handlers’ suspicions about the presence of drugs. And searches based on little more than law enforcement’s suspicions are exactly what the Fourth Amendment is supposed to prevent. (Tracking dogs that pick suspects out of “scent lineups” have had similar problems, and have led to numerous wrongful convictions.)” ^^^!!!
Ironic: DAPASTOR YOO
uncleromeo:

feet-man-ahhh-sucker-of-the-toes:


emotionsclashagainstemotions:


thatpettyblackgirl:

Because we know they value the lives of dogs over blac… nevermind 😒

the ironic part is, racism is probably why the cop was so convinced the drugs were there. the dog was doing its job, which is not reacting to drugs that don’t exist. the cop, on other hand, saw a black man, and was sure he had drugs.


Drug dogs have also been found to be ineffective in many cases, basing their reactions on the cop’s body language.
“For the purpose of this post, though, I want to focus on what’s missing from Colb’s analysis and, should the Supreme Court decide to hear the case, will almost certainly also be missing from oral arguments, the court’s ruling and most discussion of the case: that narcotics-detecting dogs and their handlers aren’t very good at discerning the presence of illegal drugs. Multiple analyses of drug-dog alerts have consistently shown alarmingly high error rates — with some close to and exceeding 50 percent. In effect, some of these K-9 units are worse than a coin flip.
For some units, the reason may be sinister — the police handler may have trained the dog to alert on command. I’ve asked dog trainers to look at videos of roadside searches in the past, and, on more than one occasion, they said they saw clear indications that a dog was being cued to alert.
But it needn’t be so malicious. While dogs are indeed capable of sniffing out illicit drugs, we’ve bred into them another overriding trait: the desire to please. Even drug dogs with conscientious handlers will read their handlers’ unintentional body language and alert accordingly. A 2010 study found that packages designed to trick handlers into thinking there were drugs inside them were much more likely to trigger false alerts than packages designed to trick the dogs. (Police-dog handlers and trainers responded to that study by refusing to cooperate with further research.) Many drug dogs, then, are not alerting to the presence of drugs, but to their handlers’ suspicions about the presence of drugs. And searches based on little more than law enforcement’s suspicions are exactly what the Fourth Amendment is supposed to prevent. (Tracking dogs that pick suspects out of “scent lineups” have had similar problems, and have led to numerous wrongful convictions.)”


^^^!!!

uncleromeo: feet-man-ahhh-sucker-of-the-toes: emotionsclashagainstemotions: thatpettyblackgirl: Because we know they value the live...

Ironic: ladylisa: gemfyre: lauralandons: thereadersmuse: jehovahhthickness: lightning-st0rm: pearlmito: smootymormonhelldream: stripedsilverfeline: anti-clerical: ramirezbundydahmer: When the Nazi concentration camps were liberated by the Allies, it was a time of great jubilation for the tens of thousands of people incarcerated in them. But an often forgotten fact of this time is that prisoners who happened to be wearing the pink triangle (the Nazis’ way of marking and identifying homosexuals) were forced to serve out the rest of their sentence. This was due to a part of German law simply known as “Paragraph 175” which criminalized homosexuality. The law wasn’t repealed until 1969. This should be required learning, internationally.  You need to know this. You need to remember this. This is not something to swept under the carpet nor be forgotten.  Never. Too many have died for the way they have loved. That needs stop now.  Make it stop?  I did a report on this in my World History class my sophomore year of high school. It was incredibly unsettling. My teacher shown the class this. Mostly everyone in the class felt uncomfortable.  I have reblogged this in the past, but it is so ironic that it comes across my dash right now. I a currently working as a docent at my city’s Holocaust Education Center (( I say currently because I’ve also done research and translation for them )) and out current exhibit is one on loan from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ((USHMM)). This is a little known historical fact that Paragraph 175 was not repealed after the war and those convicted under Nazi laws as a danger to society because they were gay were not released because they had be convicted in a court of law. There was no liberation or justice for them as they weren’t considered criminals, or even victims for that matter. They were criminals who remained persecuted and ostracized and kept on the fringes of society for decades after the war had been won. Paragraph175 wasn’t actually repealed until 1994. And it was only in May 2002, that the German parliament completed legislation to pardon all homosexuals convicted under Paragraph175 during the Nazi era. History has forgotten about these men and women — please educate yourselves so this does not happen again. Remember this history. Remember them. @mindlesshumor ok how the fuck did I miss this when I’ve studied The Holocaust like nobody’s business??? wtf Because the history we have left regarding it is literally the contents of this first hand account. It is a thin little book. When I first opened it, I wondered why it was so thin. Why there wasn’t other books like it. Other first hand accounts. By the time I finished it, I didn’t wonder anymore. Further reading: I, Pierre Seel, Deported Homosexual: A Memoir of Nazi Terror by Pierre Seel An Underground Life: Memoirs of a Gay Jew in Nazi Berlin by Gad Beck The Pink Triangle: The Nazi War Against Homosexuals by Richard Plant Branded By The Pink Triangle by Ken Setterington Bent by Martin Sherman (fiction; however, it’s often credited with bringing attention to gay Holocaust victims for the first time since the war ended) This is one of the memorial sculptures in Dachau.  It was erected in the early 60s and is missing the pink triangles.  Because in the early 60s, homosexuality was still a crime in most of the world.Our tour guide explained why the pink triangles have not been added later - if they were, then folks would assume that they had always been there.  This way people ask “why aren’t there pink triangles?” and somebody can explain why - because in some ways, the rest of the world was as bass-ackwards as Nazi Germany. Apparently, this wasnt taught in schools in the 70s-80s, cuz when I mentioned it to my mom, she had no idea that gays were held in concentration camps. She thought it was just jewish people.
Ironic: ladylisa:
gemfyre:

lauralandons:

thereadersmuse:

jehovahhthickness:

lightning-st0rm:

pearlmito:

smootymormonhelldream:

stripedsilverfeline:

anti-clerical:

ramirezbundydahmer:

When the Nazi concentration camps were liberated by the Allies, it was a time of great jubilation for the tens of thousands of people incarcerated in them. But an often forgotten fact of this time is that prisoners who happened to be wearing the pink triangle (the Nazis’ way of marking and identifying homosexuals) were forced to serve out the rest of their sentence. This was due to a part of German law simply known as “Paragraph 175” which criminalized homosexuality. The law wasn’t repealed until 1969.

This should be required learning, internationally. 

You need to know this. You need to remember this. This is not something to swept under the carpet nor be forgotten. 
Never. Too many have died for the way they have loved. That needs stop now. 
Make it stop? 

I did a report on this in my World History class my sophomore year of high school. It was incredibly unsettling.

My teacher shown the class this. Mostly everyone in the class felt uncomfortable. 

I have reblogged this in the past, but it is so ironic that it comes across my dash right now. I a currently working as a docent at my city’s Holocaust Education Center (( I say currently because I’ve also done research and translation for them )) and out current exhibit is one on loan from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ((USHMM)). This is a little known historical fact that Paragraph 175 was not repealed after the war and those convicted under Nazi laws as a danger to society because they were gay were not released because they had be convicted in a court of law. There was no liberation or justice for them as they weren’t considered criminals, or even victims for that matter. They were criminals who remained persecuted and ostracized and kept on the fringes of society for decades after the war had been won. Paragraph175 wasn’t actually repealed until 1994. And it was only in May 2002, that the German parliament completed legislation to pardon all homosexuals convicted under Paragraph175 during the Nazi era. History has forgotten about these men and women — please educate yourselves so this does not happen again. Remember this history. Remember them.

@mindlesshumor ok how the fuck did I miss this when I’ve studied The Holocaust like nobody’s business??? wtf

Because the history we have left regarding it is literally the contents of this first hand account.
It is a thin little book.
When I first opened it, I wondered why it was so thin.
Why there wasn’t other books like it.
Other first hand accounts.
By the time I finished it, I didn’t wonder anymore.

Further reading:
I, Pierre Seel, Deported Homosexual: A Memoir of Nazi Terror by Pierre Seel
An Underground Life: Memoirs of a Gay Jew in Nazi Berlin by Gad Beck
The Pink Triangle: The Nazi War Against Homosexuals by Richard Plant
Branded By The Pink Triangle by Ken Setterington
Bent by Martin Sherman (fiction; however, it’s often credited with bringing attention to gay Holocaust victims for the first time since the war ended)

This is one of the memorial sculptures in Dachau.  It was erected in the early 60s and is missing the pink triangles.  Because in the early 60s, homosexuality was still a crime in most of the world.Our tour guide explained why the pink triangles have not been added later - if they were, then folks would assume that they had always been there.  This way people ask “why aren’t there pink triangles?” and somebody can explain why - because in some ways, the rest of the world was as bass-ackwards as Nazi Germany.


Apparently, this wasnt taught in schools in the 70s-80s, cuz when I mentioned it to my mom, she had no idea that gays were held in concentration camps. She thought it was just jewish people.

ladylisa: gemfyre: lauralandons: thereadersmuse: jehovahhthickness: lightning-st0rm: pearlmito: smootymormonhelldream: stripedsilv...