! ! ! You Are What You Say You Are ! ! !

radical queerness is everywhere. there are people who have confusing feelings about their race, age, abilities, WHATEVER else, and don't have a word for it. They will find it. there are paraphiles who are familiar with their attractions but don't know where to go, or what to do about it. They will know. they probably feel like freaks right now, though. as more and more people discover what radqueer is and what it means, the antis will fade out. you cannot stifle the expressions, the realness and the happiness of so many people. 🌈🍓

do you have a website ?

We do! It's under construction though, but once it's up we will make a dedicated post about it as well as add it to our pinned! 😊🪷

Free to use printable resources stickers!

One with and without the QR code

Despite popular belief, smelling bad is not actually a crime and should not be used to judge someone's morality or character. Lots of good people smell stank as hell. Real bad. You can acknowledge that bad smells are unpleasant, and how you might not want to be around someone who stinks (I choose to suck it up personally, just acknowledging it as an option!) without perpetuating a sentiment that causes disadvantaged people to face more harm and scrutiny. Stand up for stinky people I'm being so genuine rn.

I can just imagine saying “lobotomies are bad” in like 1949 and having someone say “you’re wrong, the science is settled, lobotomies are the best way to treat mental illness” and guess what? In 1949 I might be the unpopular and socially wrong one. The person with the backwards, conservative thinking. That is the year that António Egas Moniz won the Nobel Prize for lobotomies.

Lobotomies are still bad, but a lot of people have now understood that it’s a deeply harmful and anti-human practice. It was often performed on women (60% of cases were women in the US, a study in Ontario put women patients at 72%) and on gay men. Societal mores have changed on what is psychiatrically appropriate—many of these women were depressed and repressed housewives, or were not naturally submissive to their husbands and considered “combative”.

Many lobotomies were called “ice pick lobotomies” because they involved inserting an ice pick through the eye to sever the part of your brain that feels emotions. There were different techniques, largely dependent on which surgeon you saw. Norbert Wiener said in 1948, "Prefrontal lobotomy... has recently been having a certain vogue, probably not unconnected with the fact that it makes the custodial care of many patients easier. Let me remark in passing that killing them makes their custodial care still easier."

In 1944, the Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease ran an article saying, “The history of prefrontal lobotomy has been brief and stormy. Its course has been dotted with both violent opposition and with slavish, unquestioning acceptance."

Walter Freeman called the practice “surgically induced childhood”—he specialized in lobotomies and performed them until 1967, so he found this to be a good outcome. In fact, he worked on an “assembly line” process where he could lobotomies 20 people a day, and even did a surgical procedure face-off with another doctor in 1948 to compete in an operating theatre to show an audience of doctors that his technique was superior. The other professor was a professor at Yale, William Beecher Scoville, another famous lobotomist known for proliferating the procedure. They called it a miracle cure, and the gold standard for psychiatric treatment.

Scoville’s most famous patient, Henry Molaison, was a 7-year old boy with epilepsy after a fall from his bike. Scoville couldn’t find the problem, so he just destroyed all three regions of Henry’s temporal lobes. Afterwards, the surgeon noted memory loss “so severe as to prevent the patient from remembering the location of the rooms in which he lives, the names of his close associates, or even the way to the toilet or the urinal.”

Scoville’s wife sought psychiatric care after her husband cheated on her and she had a breakdown. Her husband lobotomized her himself.

In the 1960s, when schizophrenia became a radicalized charged diagnosis that was often used against Black people, especially those involved in the civil rights struggle. Walter Freeman did several pushes to lobotomize Black people, including as young as five, for “hyperactive and aggressive behavior”.

The practice continued in some places until the 1980s. It was used to treat schizophrenia, affective disturbance (mood disorders and people reacting in non-mainstream ways like being an opinionated woman or gay), and OCD, chronic neurosis (anxiety), psychopathic disorders, and depression, among other things. You may notice the old names for these things—things that we might not consider the same way now. Being gay was a mental disorder. Women who wanted independence or respect were often diagnosed. Not fulfilling your traditional societal role was a good way to end up institutionalized.

It was considered, at time of invention, to be an humane alternative to insulin comas and shock therapy (ECT). Many people considered it lifesaving and gold standard treatment for mental illness. Some reports believe that about a third of patients found the procedure beneficial. Others faced dementia, death, incontinence, inability to speak, paralysis, and other effects. Many people were unable to ever leave care again afterwards, though they were more complacent.

I don’t think any scientist who tells you that science is settled is a good scientist. I think that treatments that target people who don’t fit the mold of society, people who are countercultural, and people from marginalized groups should be especially criticized. Psychiatry is a very new field. Part of the phasing out of lobotomies had to do with the development of the first medications for psychiatric use—which in turn have had their own social, political, and ethical conundrums and misuse. Many could consider Valium (“mother’s little helper”) the spiritual successor to the lobotomy.

But in 1949, if I said lobotomies are bad—I might have been met with “Do you hate mentally ill people?” “It works great for most people!” “Without it, she will just be depressed and kill herself” or “My friend did it and all her problems seem better now”.

Lobotomies were bad the whole time.

MAP facts

Infographic made by be, information found from the website below

mapresources.info (this website has further articles, books, ect cited)

these facts aren’t all directly related to maps, but they relate to things often brought up along with them.

this is intended to educate people and spread unbiased information, if you find that there is misinformation or an inaccuracy, then if you wish: please share this respectfully

Disrespectful and ingenue comments will be deleted

(~tags for reach~)

May I ask how is Daddy's Little Toy missunderstod? It's not like Genderqueer where people wanted it to be banned because of transphobia. It's not like that. Daddy's Little Toy is not missunderstod. It's just a book where you supposed to be happy when a girl get's together with her groomer.

It's not a another Lolita. Lolita is not a romanc, and the writer of it did everything ín his power to make shure people know that. He himself was a surviver of CSA. And was a psychologist who showed in the book how awfull people justafy themself, but it's still veary clear that the main character is in the wrong when you read between the lines. Main whaile Daddy's Little Toy is a romance book, that the writer dedicated to her 3 years old dauther. The writer is niether a surviver of CSA, or a psychologist (probably doasn't know anything about it), and you are supposed to like the guy.

Wow 😑

Where the actual fuck did you get your information? 🤨

Let's start with Lolita:

Lolita was written by the Vladimir Nabokov. His life has been extensively documented by biographers and in his own memoirs, and there has never once been any suggestion that he was a victim of CSA

Nabokov was not a psychologist. Indeed, he was known for his strong and complex opinions about psychology. Most notably he openly mocked and rejected Freudian psychoanalysis

Lolita was very specifically modeled after the romance genre

Lolita is indeed written from the perspective of the abuser, but one element you may be missing is that the narrator Humbert does such a good job endearing himself and excusing, minimizing, and justifying his actions, that readers constantly fall into the trap of sympathizing, and even agreeing with him. The very term "Lolita" nowadays is used to mean a sort of precocious seductress because of this.

Continuing on to Genderqueer:

Regardless of their real reasons behind it, critics of Genderqueer always point to one or two panels that depict sexual activity. Taken out of context, they appear shocking and inappropriate. This is exactly what the critics of Daddy's Little Toy are doing. The biggest difference is that the critics actually managed to succeed this time.

And finally, as for Daddy's Little Toy:

Most people would undoubtedly consider Lolita to be the better book, but so what? Are we only allowed to read books about shocking or offensive subject matter if they are well-written? Who decides this? Why does it matter?

You have not read this book. I know that for a fact. You personally have no idea what the book is like. No one does, because the book cannot be found anywhere. You are simply parroting the incendiary claims from TikToks.

I don't fucking care if the book is one long, graphic description of a kindergarten bukkake party. It is fiction. It is not real. No one is harmed by it. It is the easiest thing in the world to avoid reading it. In fact there is no way that you can read it! So why does anyone even care?

I hope that clears things up for you.

You CAN be eco friendly with tech!!

Use energy saver mode

Dont keep your pc and chargers plugged in when not in use. Better yet, get outlets that can switch off.

Buy energy efficient products

Replace parts instead of scrapping the whole product, and when it is beyond repair, recycle or sell for parts

Replace your phone battery instead of buying a new phone

Buy used/refurbished. They’re just as good as new, but youre not contributing to more demand

Try to buy local

Buy sustainably sourced accessories or ones that can be easily composted or properly disposed of

Use Ecosia to plant trees while you search

Use wildhero to plant trees with your email

Limit AI usage