Ok I Found Out This Isn't Common A While Ago And I Need To Know

Readers, make sure you have all your favourite Ao3 fics downloaded.

Writers, make sure you have copies of all the fics you have posted on Ao3.

I don’t want to be alarming, but things could get really bad really fast. OTW shared this today on Twitter, and I'm a bit worried about it 😅

Ao3 is a non-profit organisation. If they have to start paying taxes, I have no idea what will happen.

Imagine being Alfred during Batman Begins when Bruce leaves to “find himself.” Alfred is worried, but reminds himself that all rich men do this and he’s probably just going to come back as a worldly, obnoxious vegetarian. Then Bruce shows up several years later buff as hell and it’s like no, he’s a ninja. he’s a ninja and he wants to terrorize Gotham in a bat costume.

Ick setera

Thanks, Anon!

-submit your poll!-

pray for those who hate you

pray for those who mock you

pray for those who curse you

pray for those who belittle you

pray for those who laugh at you

pray for those who persecute you

pray for those who can't stand you

pray for those who would never pray for you.

Bat Family is Multilingual

While that seems like an obvious observation, not enough people talk about it, either on this site on anywhere else. But yeah, the Bats are a polyglot household. And for those that grew up speaking more than one language, we all know the mayhem that brings.

You know the "spanglish" and "portenglish" that we create? It's on another level at the Wayne residence. Conversations switch languages every sentence, for their dialect of gibberish to anyone outside of it.

For example, the conversation goes: English -> Spanish -> Swahili -> Aramaic -> Mandarin -> Portuguese -> Patuá (Macanese Patois) -> Romani -> Navajo -> Kryptonian -> Coptic -> Arabic -> Doric Greek (Greek from Sparta) -> Griko (Greek dialect in Italy) -> Cherokee -> Vietnamese -> Nahuatl -> Hebrew -> Back to English

Also, they switch languages depending on what they're cooking and proceed to shout it across the kitchen. The loudest The Latin ones and Arabic.

Even sign language is multilingual. The family has their version of it (created by Cass, which uses more body language and movements that show things and feelings instead of words), but they switch between American, British, French, New Zealand, Irish, Brazilian, Maritime, Hong Kong, Inuit, Ka'apor, and even Plains Indian SL on the daily basis. It's so varied that for an outsider, it just looks like their gesturing half the time.

And honestly, I think it all started with an angry Bruce learning French and German from Alfred.

Preach!!!

So what if I'm not good enough?

No, seriously. So what if I'm not 'good enough'?

Who am I hurting by not being good enough? No one. Writing is a craft that gives, not takes away. Even the worst stories in the world can give the reader something, whether it was meant to or not.

So what if I gain a reputation for being a 'bad' writer? So what if people avoid my work for all the reasons I fear? So what? No seriously. So what?

I own who I am. I write my own words. They come from my heart alone. I don't use the plagiarism machine. I don't lie about my ethnicity. I don't exploit other people. I don't harass others, or chase them off social media. I don't hurt people to lift myself up, or for my own selfish fun. I'm not an asshole, at least, I try not to be.

So what if I'm not 'good enough'? So what if you're 'not good enough'? There's so much worse things to be than that.

And at the end of the day, I'm pretty sure, the only person who thinks I'm not good enough is myself. I mean, have you ever once looked at another person, nevermind a writer, and gone 'you're not good enough'? I haven't. I bet you haven't either.

Maybe you and I, we should show ourselves a little kindness tonight.

https://chng.it/CXZFJTqwGt

Help out an innocent teenager

Hey, I'm stumped on this objection, if it's alright, I want your input on this

"For these types of people I always give them a hypothetical situation for them answer So if you knew your wife was going to die by giving birth to the child would you let Your wife get an abortion or would you let your wife die in the child grow up without a mother?"

What do you think?

I would answer that the choice is never actually that simple. We imagine this cinematic moment where the doctor comes out to talk to the anxious husband in the waiting room and says “Sir, we can only save one of them. Should we save your wife or your child?” and he has to make that choice.

That makes a very dramatic movie scene, but it’s not real.

There are three categories of “life of the mother” situations:

1. Very early pregnancy. Mother has a life threatening condition and cannot be kept stable until the child reaches viability (now around 22 weeks with evidence-based best practices). Even in these situations, a direct abortion isn’t the life-saving care. Usually we’re talking about the mother needing a treatment for her life-threatening condition that risks the life of the baby. Most ethical choice is to treat the mother. If the baby dies as a result of the treatment, that is a tragic loss. If the baby doesn’t die, awesome! In this category, there is no way to save the baby without saving the mother, because if the mother died, the baby would too. Ectopic pregnancies fall in this category because there is currently no way to save the baby. If we developed the ability to get ectopic embryos to successfully re-implant in the uterus, that would become the ethical option.

2. Late-term complications. I’m going out of order here for a reason. This is anything where the mother’s life-threatening health issue starts after viability, but especially when we’re talking 30 weeks and on. Baby’s chance of survival with an early delivery goes up rapidly as baby approaches full term. In these cases, if the mother needs immediate treatment for a life threatening issue, she doesn’t actually need her baby to die. There is no reason to choose between the mother and child. A C-section is actually safer than a late-term abortion, since third trimester abortions usually still involve the mother laboring and delivering a dead baby. If the concern, as posed in the original hypothetical, is that she would “die by giving birth,” then she probably just needs a C-section (or a better doctor).

3. The third category is the most complex one. This is when the life threatening issue for the other begins when the child cannot yet survive outside the womb, but may be able to in a few weeks. This is where the difficult decisions are made. This category includes women diagnosed with cancer who might decide to delay treatment to protect their child until their child can be safely delivered. However, even here we can see examples of mothers who choose to receive treatment without first killing their child, and doctors who find innovative ways to treat life-threatening illnesses without harming preborn children.

The true answer is “save them both.” We can’t always - just as any doctor knows in a triage situation they can’t always save all the patients. The decision of who to save is never based on which patient is more human, more valuable, or more worth saving. The answer is instead based on how the doctor can save the greatest number of patients. If the doctor can save everyone, they do. If the doctor knows a course of action means for sure saving one patient, while another might not make it, but the alternative is losing both, then they will choose to save at least one. We almost never see a situation where the doctor has to arbitrarily choose between two patients - the decision is always based on the condition of each patient, the resources available, how much time there is, etc. There are algorithms for this kind of thing.

Basically I refuse to let unrealistic hypotheticals dictate actual policy on saving children.

Because people believe in the “we can only save one, choose!” scenario, we get doctors telling women that they will die if they don’t get an abortion, and then they cry to the media that they had to go to Colorado or California to get their “life-saving procedure.” The reality is that either the doctor could have treated the mother without first killing the baby and given the baby a chance to survive, or they could have delivered the baby and then treated the mother.

Anyone who says they couldn’t do the first option under ____ state abortion law is either lying or ignorant. If the mother’s condition is actually life-threatening, every state allows doctors to treat the mother. Killing a child doesn’t cure any illness.

Hey fun fact people care about you