noidretina
Presumably existant entity
INTJ | they/them/any | agender transfem | aroace
646 posts
Don't wanna be here? Send us removal request.
Last Seen Blogs
angel1cc
boi if you don't
out-in-the-darkside
The Darkside
ywpd-translations
Yowamushi Pedal Translations
tr0picalshorty
Welcum
snowthornes
Aspen ☂
Text
Imagine getting a tumblr notification that's like 'hey, this person you follow posted something for the first time in a while' and it's just this post.
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
KOSA IS GETTING FORCED THROUGH
ATTACHED ARE SCRIPTS FOR EITHER A DEM OR REP SENATOR
CALL NOW PLEASE
49K notes
·
View notes
Video
Bleeeeugh om niom niomniom blereegh
366K notes
·
View notes
Text
the problem with reading and writing leading to a strong vocabulary is that you tend to know the vibe of words instead of their meanings.
if I used this word in a sentence, would it make sense? absolutely. if you asked me what it meant, could I tell you? absolutely not.
#mood#same#and how dare you be relatable#writing#creative writing#vocabulary#writers of tumblr#noidretina.rb#noidretina.writing
128K notes
·
View notes
Text
Hi! This is a rickroll. Please visit youtube dot com, type "never gonna give you up" in the search bar, then click on the first video that comes up. Thank you for your consideration.
124K notes
·
View notes
Text
#ah yes#attacking with a simple question#this isn't about you senator#if your argument can be destroyed by the truth it should be#noidretina.rb#noidretina.queer#noidretina.world#transphobia#tw transphobia#tw transphobes
91K notes
·
View notes
Text
In recent times, I've kinda taken Zoe Bee's "PragerU and the Politics of Pain" video to heart, and it's actually lead to some pretty big realizations in the political divide. Not everything boils down to pain, but a lot does.
Take the Abortion debate, for example.
Pro-life people think that abortions are murder to unborn fetuses, while Pro-choice people think that they aren't technically people and should be able to abort for reason of didn't want to get pregnant/was SA'd/can't afford to raise a child/none of your business; it's my life.
In short, for Pro-life people, it's about the unborn baby, while for Pro-choice people, it's about the would-be parent.
Pro-life people think that the value of an unborn child is above all else because they chose to have unprotected sex, and therefore, should endure the consequences of those actions. Or maybe they didn't choose and should just suck it up and deal with it. Pro-choice people think that people shouldn't have to endure these hardships, because people make mistakes and things happen. It doesn't mean people should always suffer because of them.
Pro-life people don't care about the parent because it's their fault and they should endure pain as a result. Pro-choice people care about the would-be parent because something went wrong and they shouldn't have to suffer.
Pro-life people think pain is necessary. Pro-choice people think pain is preventable.
The core of this argument lies within this pain-centralized question.
Another one of Zoe Bee's videos, "How to Argue on the Internet (And Win) | A Professor Explains", explains Stasis Theory and (briefly) mentions that the issue with the Pro-life/Pro-choice Abortion debate lies with definition. Pro-life people define a fetus as a living creature, while Pro-choice people do not.
But again, this can just be expanded and reduced to whether or not the would-be parent should endure pain.
A pro-choice person can try to argue that it's their life and they should be able to do what they want(it's not like they're preventing pro-life people from birthing), but that's not the issue here. A pro-life counterargument would be something along the lines of, "by that logic, if a creep has a relationship with a minor, that doesn't affect you, so that shouldn't be a problem." Put simply, 'live & let live' or 'to each their own' can't really apply here, because pro-life people think this is a matter of law and murder. This is trying to fix a definition level problem at policy level.
A pro-life person can launch an argument of "If a pregnant woman gets kicked in the stomach and the fetus dies, would the attacker be guilty?" The obvious response, regardless of political stance, would be yes. The pro-life person would compare this to abortion. "What's the difference?" The pro-choice counterargument? Consent. The would-be mother did not consent to the perishing of their unborn child. But Pro-life people might argue that consent is irrelevant here. Either way, the unborn child is dead. This is, again, trying to fix a definition level problem at policy level.
It just doesn't work.
So the way to fix this issue? Reach a consensus on whether a fetus is alive or not. But... how? In a literal sense, single cell organisms are living. Insects are living. So much is living. But killing an ant isn't considered murder. So where do you draw the line? Or, more specifically, where is an unborn fetus along that line? And even more so, how do you change someone's mind on that?
How would a pro-life person convince a pro-choice person that the fetus deserves life? How would a pro-choice person convince the pro-life person that it should be the would-be parent's decision?
How would a pro-life person convince a pro-choice person that the parent doesn't matter? How would a pro-choice person convince a pro-life person that the would-be parent does matter?
How would a pro-life person convince a pro-choice person that the parent should go through hardship? How would a pro-choice person convince a pro-life person that the would-be parent should be spared from suffering?
How would you convince someone who thinks pain is bad that pain is good?
How would you convince someone who thinks pain is good that pain is bad?
...
I'll end my ambiguity here. I'm pro-choice.
So how do we reach a consensus?
...
I don't know.
#abortion#tw politics#political#Zoe Bee#tw sexual assault mention#pro-choice#politics#noidretina.world
0 notes
Text
(BAD) UPDATE ON KOSA !
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/02/dont-fall-latest-changes-dangerous-kids-online-safety-act
This may seem grim but we Can still stop this bill if we focus on contacting senators /the House and keep spreading the word.
PLEASE REBLOG !
Join our Discord server to organize against it :
https://discord.gg/pwTSXZMxnH
TAKE ACTION HERE
https://www.badinternetbills.com/
MORE INFO HERE
https://www.tumblr.com/taikeero-lecoredier/709890130733826048/these-twos-bills-are-very-bad-for-the-future-of
SPREAD THE WORD !
#censorship#and it always starts with 'protecting children'#from what?#the truth?#look I understand that some content shouldn't be readily available to minors#but there is a fine line between preventing minors from harmful content#and preventing them from actually really important content#preventing someone from accessing info about marginalized groups(that they may be a part of) can make someone feel isolated and alone#preventing someone from accessing info on depression and suicide can cause them to undermine their symptoms and allow them to worsen#preventing someone from accessing info on sexual abuse can allow someone to normalize being SA'd#noidretina.rb#noidretina.world
10K notes
·
View notes
Text
yesterday, tumblr totally deleted the account of a prominent trans girl on this website because she was posting safe for work transition timeline photos. this is supposedly "the queerest place on the internet" but i haven't seen anybody but trans girls talking about this. why does nobody else give a fuck?
#transphobia#more staff antics#why am I not surprised#noidretina.rb#noidretina.queer#noidretina.world
17K notes
·
View notes
Text
yeah im a disaster but at least im not a heterosexual
1K notes
·
View notes
Text
happy wednesday to all my fellow aroace folks
30K notes
·
View notes
Text
a while ago i attended this lecture on autism. guy in the audience said he had many of the symptoms that were presented and asked what should he do to get treatment and possibly a diagnosis. instead of answering his question the psychologist went on a tangent about how “the clinic reigns all powerful over guesswork”, and how actually it has become a trend amongst little children on the internet to claim that they are autistic for cool points, and that this hurts real autistic people. no she didn’t tell him how to get his symptoms looked into, she just made it very clear that to her, aknowledging your own symptoms is bad and evil and hurts the poor real mentally ill people.
an ex-friend of mine, then a psychology major and by now probably a full psychologist, once lectured me on how horrible and bad it was that i told her “i probably have some sort of neurodivergency”, and that if i were her patient she would never give me a diagnosis because “you aren’t like this now, but i know that if you get a diagnosis you’ll use it as an excuse to start treating people badly. that’s just how mentally ill people are.”
same ex-friend was extremely disgusted when she found out that fans sometimes make neurodivergency headcanons for characters that have the same symptoms as they do, and that authors sometimes write books with neurodivergent protagonists in stories that don’t focus on that (ex: she seemed horrified that percy jackson has adhd?)
multiple psychologists i’ve seen on facebook agree that they should refuse to treat patients that say “i’m here because i have symptoms of a disorder and wonder if i have it”, and that a patient should arrive to a psychologist as a blank slate.
school psychologist asked me how i was feeling about my trauma situation and i told him i thought my friends would leave me. instead of addressing the issue he said that that no i didn’t, that i was lying, that i had searched “bpd symptoms” online and now i was faking symptoms because i wanted to have bpd, that he shouldn’t have told me he suspected i had a personality disorder because now look what was happening. no, i didn’t search bpd symptoms online. yes, my friends left me, it was a completely founded belief and not a symptom, let alone a faked symptom.
so the next time you hear someone saying they’re “anti self-diagnosis” i want you to understand what they’re saying. what they’re saying is:
- i don’t want people to be aware of their own symptoms
- i don’t think my patients should have access to any information that doesn’t come from me
- i don’t think neurodivergent people should learn how to cope with their symptoms and live “normal” lives
- i think neurodivergent people should be denied a diagnosis because the moment they get one they will become evil and dangerous
- i don’t think people who don’t look like a stereotype could possibly be neurodivergent, even if they have all the symptoms, so i think they are faking it for attention and should be denied treatment
101K notes
·
View notes
Text
#realistically tho#if any of my roommates died I'd have like 30 days to find a new place to live#I can't really afford a huge share of rent#even worse is in order to break the lease I'd have to pay the remainder of the money required for the lease#basically forcing me into having to get an eviction for being unable to pay#further preventing me from finding a new place because of an eviction tied to my name#capitalist hellhole#just a hypothetical tho#noidretina.rb#noidretina.world
135K notes
·
View notes
Text
okay guys. This is important, please click a button
Please reblog I need a lot of people to do this :)
(Edit: in advance before anyone complains—i know i’m missing things like “k” and “Kay”. But this is for the word okay. The full thing. And if you do multiple variations of it, just click the one you do the most 🩵)
47 notes
·
View notes
Text
Happy 14th!
Alternative version under cut
600 notes
·
View notes