Um Before You Ladies Get Real Hype About The Jonas Brothers Comeback Never Forget That Joe Jonas Asked

hey, not to be the one wielding the 'studio-led sequel culture strips out the message of the original work' sword, but i feel like there's a parable out there about corporations ignoring scientific advice in the face of endangering the masses for profit, and i just can't remember what it is.

Someone linked me this. (https://www.facebook.com/mcgregazil/posts/10218725218181118)

I hate hate HATE all those 2edgy 4me theories about kids shows. Like Angelica dreaming up the rugrats, or the ed, edd, and eddy children being ghosts, or literally anything that takes a lighthearted and fun kids show and has to turn it into some tragic take of rape or murder or misinformed mental illness. So you know what? From now on I’m gonna do the exact opposite. Every cool grim-dark show is now because of a bunch of children. To get us started: Game of Thrones: A middle-school DnD campaign with the most angry, vindictive DM who has promised to kill everyone’s player characters (and their family) by the end.

[Image: Tweet by Emily Mullin (@EmilyLMullin) and tweet by Isobelle Winter (@IsobelleWinter), both about the dangers of Facebook’s new preventative health screening tool. Images have been modified for visual ease but information has not been changed.]

Something to know about Facebook’s new “screening tool,” and advice/info that can most certainly be used outside of this specific situation.

For spoonies, the biggest deal is how this data, if leaked, could affect you in professional and insurance spheres.

Here’s Emily’s full thread, which discusses the details of the tool, and here’s Isobelle’s full thread, which extrapolates on specific dangers.

In the end? It’s another data grab. Data is worth money; don’t give yours away, especially not to Facebook.

hannah gadsy roasting the shit out of men in douglas (2020)

my least favorite aspect of the “slytherins are oppressed uwu” thing that keeps happening is when people try to say that J.K. Rowling has “anti-slytherin bias” because she shows the school-age slytherins as all being snobbish and 100% deserving of the reputation they have

like you guys know hogwarts is not a real place, right? there isn’t actually any such thing as slytherin. 

Jo Rowling is not a journalist who failed to report the story objectively because she has a personal vendetta against slytherin house borne of pervasive anti-slytherin prejudices in our society

She’s an author who made up slytherin and decided that the majority of them would be exactly as big of dicks as everyone thinks they are. Rowling literally can’t be anything but objective with regards to Harry Potter canon. She’s literally omniscient in the world she created, and if she wrote Slytherin house as being just full of dicks, even the 11-year-olds who are sorted into it (of their own free will, you can’t be officially sorted into a house you don’t want to be in, the first year slytherins wanted to be in slytherin and most of them, even muggleborns, know how much importance slytherin places on elitist snobbery in possible students)

If you think racist, classist, status-obsessed, snobbish slytherins are the exception rather than the rule, the problem isn’t that J.K. has an anti-slytherin bias, it’s that you have a pro-slytherin bias, and a bias in favor of the house that caters to both the privileged and supremacists by design is not a bias you should be proud of having

However, the thesis statement here is this is fake. You’re literally saying that a woman who pretended a whole planet of wizards for your entertainment is somehow wrong about how the world she made up operates. It’s like when the Supernatural writers said they spell Castiel’s nickname “Cass” and the fans said the writers were wrong. I agree that’s a dumb way to spell a shorter version of “Castiel.” Supernatural is a dumb show. However, if you find yourself saying that you, a fan, are more of an authority on canon than the literal writers who make up the canon for your consumption, you have overstepped your bounds as a member of the audience. 

Have headcanons about nice, non-racist slytherins if you insist. Say the books would have been better if Harry’s slytherin classmates had been more three-dimensional, or if the series had explored the idea of students going to slytherin because they expected it to be the “ambitious” house and being mortified to find out they’re actually stuck in the racist house. 

Please, though, put the “Rowling’s anti-slytherin bias” card back in the deck and leave it there forever, it doesn’t make sense and it shows me you think “the person who wrote the story told the series of events they made up inaccurately” makes more sense than “like the omniscient narrator and many of the characters said, there’s a problem is slytherin house.”

tl;dr: harry potter is a good book but it’s made up so why are you trying to spare the feelings of pretend racists

new story

it’s been 3 months, so i’m legally allowed to share my first officially published story for free. previously published in Massacre Magazine, under the Gorey Skelton pen name

leave feedback in the replies! (i seriously love feedback, but my tumblr inbox is a mess)

Medieval Weapon Concepts