Remy has the badge

1.5M ratings
277k ratings

See, that’s what the app is perfect for.

Sounds perfect Wahhhh, I don’t wanna
neuroticboyfriend
gendercriminals

I have another thought rattling around my head;

I know it’s really easy for people to assume a man or masc person getting help with something is simply wielding false incompetence - or that that they view whoever is helping as a maid or a servant.

But I need people to stop blanket assuming shit like this. If it’s all just things you’re seeing rather then a bad situation you’re being told about directly; Take a step back and ask yourself if you might be misconstruing a situation you don’t have all the context for.

Example; I need meals made for me, I need help with basic chores, I need help getting myself drinks, I need help caring for pets. Outwardly, I look fine - but the thing a lot of people with no inside perspective don’t know that I’m actually severely disabled. What might be a simple task for someone else could wipe me out for days. And because of this I’ve actively had people call me a “man child” when I admit I need help with these things, and say they feel bad for my partners having to “baby me” because of this.

I’ve seen so many threads bashing men and masc folks as a whole for not being able to cook for themselves, do chores entirely by themselves, ect ect ect.

You’re hurting people in the crossfire - especially disabled men + masc folk, and men + masc folk who have suffered abuse (since abusers often intentionally don’t teach their victims life skills in order to keep them dependent).

stardusted-queerness

I'm a masculine person. If you were to look at me, you'd only see 3 lil scars around my right knee and my cane as the only indicators that I'm not fully able-bodied. You'd also notice that I wear glasses.

Most of my disabilities are invisible. I can't really walk that far without some type of support (whether that's a cane, walker, or leaning heavily on another person), and I cannot see for the life of me. I wear my glasses because they have prisms in them, which help with my nystagmus (a nystagmus is where you have uncontrollable eye movements). My glasses don't correct my vision. They only help with another medical condition.

I can cook only very basic things, like instant ramen or 5 minute rice. Because of my vision, I don't trust myself with stoves and ovens, because I'm more likely to burn myself than my spouse is (who has 20/20 vision - mine is in the 20/2600 range). I don't really trust myself on stairs because I can't see the steps. 9 times out of 10, I will ask my spouse to either help me make something, or supervise me so I don't end up severely injuring myself.

Talking shit about masculine people and men hurts people like me and OP. If I didn't tell you I was blind and had instability issues with my knees and ankles, you'd think I was just another lazy "wife" who doesn't do shit for their spouse, when - in reality - I'm disabled and physically can't do things. Dishes wipes me out for at least 2 days. Sweeping/dusting/vacuming/cleaning rooms in general wipes me out for 4 to 7 days. Taking a shower wipes me out for at least 3 days. Cooking is nearly out of the question at this point. Stop saying that people with a certain characteristic or presentation are wrong for asking for help. You only feed the stereotypes when you do that.

this is intersectional feminism
potatoshoe
lifeamongtheamazons

For my linguistsics degree, I did a project on why I'm seeing more people saying "on accident" instead of "by accident." I looked at almost a million pieces of writing pulled from news sites, blogs, academic articles and television transcripts. I found almost three hundred cases of "on accident" being used. It was a surprisingly even spread across sources. Even more interesting, I organized the hits by date and tracked an upward swing in use as time goes on. This means that the use of "on accident" is increasing over time, and may eventually supplant and drive out the classic usage of "by accident." I like to call this prepositional shift.

Now, looking at my data and looking at the age ranges of the writers or speakers, the majority of them were under the age of thirty. So I interviewed a panel of people, choosing twenty with a spread of about half above thirty, and half below. Those older than thirty years of age felt "strongly" or "very strongly" that "on accident" was wrong in all cases, and that "by accident" was the only correct phrase. However, those younger than thirty were much less rigorous, with more than half feeling "ambivalent" or "less strongly" about which was correct. This demonstrates a generational link in preposition usage.

When presented with options for the definitions of "by" and "on," we also get some interesting data. For by, there are two main definitions according to the Oxford English Dictionary: 1. Identifying the agent performing an action. Or 2. Indicating the means of achieving something. Whereas "on" has many more definitions, the pertinent ones being 1. To indicate the manner of doing something or 2. To indicate active involvement in a condition or status. By the above definitions, either "by accident" or "on accident" is a correct usage of the term. However, native speakers of English could not successfully define either preposition, instead just choosing one, the other, or both as "sounding correct."

The only evidence for a rule-based shift that I could find was a correlation with the paired phrase for the opposite condition "on purpose." While the younger interviewees were ambivalent about the correctness of "on accident," they uniformly rejected the correctness of the suggested phrase "by purpose." So the shift can only be in one direction according the the native ear, towards the preposition "on."

Whether this means that the particular usage of "by" is becoming archaic or the definition of "on" is expanding is a possible subject of further study using a wider range of phrases. But I found the wider acceptance of "on accident" versus "by accident" to be a fascinating look at how prepositions can shift meaning and usage over time.

So now I'm curious, five years from my initial study (and itching to try the Tumblr poll feature):

How do you feel about the use of "on accident"?

It's grammatically wrong, and possibly also cursed. I will die on this hill.

It might be right sometimes. I'd have to hear it.

Meh. Why do we care about this?

It's fine. ON accident, BY accident. Both are okay!

...what is this BY accident thing? You don't do things BY purpose!

headspace-hotel

I think both are fine but the final poll option makes a compelling point...

im 30 and both sound equally wrong tumblr poll english is englishing again
creekfiend
ben-learns-smth

I always bring a book just in case but today I forgot and now I’m bored on the train, so

what is the one (1) thing you always bring with you that isn’t your phone, wallet, or keys?

a book

a snack

a drink

a fidget toy

headphones/earphones

an extra piece of clothing (jacket, sweater, ..)

a hat/cap

none of these, it’s actually… (tags pls!)

actually two or more are integral to my survival (tags pls!)

show results

reblogs appreciated!

i have a backpack that has a portable charger disposable masks wet wipes and a flashlight im always wearing a beanie but its not a just in case item i wear it all the time
worth-beyond-a-number-scale
the overeating one is bad and i hate each of these in a special way but one i didnt see mentioned it gluttony personified as fat also i feel like a pedo being fat is distinctly different from just being a villian i became painfully aware of this with sandman tumblr poll
nightcatssketchbook
trans-mom

Captions shouldn't be censored. If the video says fuck or cum or cunt the captions should say the fucking word.

dancing-jestress

Unless it's a slur! No one needs to see that.

trans-mom

If they say a slur in the video, the captions should reflect it. The disabled are not little babies who have to have life sanitized for them.

sunbummonkey

okay but I feel like ur forgetting that slurs don't just apply to the disabled... children don't need to be seeing the n-word or other racial slurs??

trans-mom

but children DO need to be hearing it? are you actually reading the post here?

melonsap

Here's how it works when subtitles are done properly:

Audio: Let's BEEP go!
Subtitle: Let's (censor tone) go!

Audio: Let's fucking go!
Subtitle: Let's fucking go!

Removing swears and slurs from the subtitles without removing it from the audio is implying that deaf/HoH people need babying, unlike their hearing friends and family sitting right next to them. Which is frustrating.

The point of subtitles is to give the same experience to everyone watching, regardless of ability—not to be a more palatable version of what's being said.

captions subtitles
prehensilepussylips
prehensilepussylips:
“wilwheaton:
“I have never heard of Dan Bongino, but I am truly impressed by his display of tiny dick energy.
”
wow. everyone here sucks.
mr. bongino here is clearly a conservative shit head. everything about him here screams...
wilwheaton

I have never heard of Dan Bongino, but I am truly impressed by his display of tiny dick energy.

prehensilepussylips

wow. everyone here sucks.

mr. bongino here is clearly a conservative shit head. everything about him here screams toxic masculinity and insecurity

mr king over there is being an entitled asshat. ofc podcasting is a real job. same way writing is, you jackass

and you, mr wheaton, are being ableist and transphobic by reducing someone’s worth to a commentary about their genitals. if you have something to say about someone, say it without attacking their body. but i guess i shouldn’t expect too much from a post stealing peacock. (hey, look at that. an example.)

Source: i.redd.it
reblogging a better version of this post bc the version that ended up on my dash pissed me off