I’m posting this here too for the anniversary
happy suez canal blockage day everyone, may another boat get stuck there soon
9K notes
·
View notes
One of my biggest nitpicks in fiction concerns the feeding of babies. Mothers dying during/shortly after childbirth or the baby being separated form the mother shortly after birth is pretty common in fiction. It is/was also common enough in real life, which is why I think a lot of writers/readers don't think too hard about this. however. Historically, the only reason the vast majority of babies survived being separated from their mother was because there was at least one other woman around to breastfeed them. Before modern formula, yes, people did use other substitutes, but they were rarely, if ever, nutritionally sufficient.
Newborns can't eat adult food. They can't really survive on animal milk. If your story takes place in a world before/without formula, a baby separated from its mother is going to either be nursed by someone else, or starve.
It doesn't have to be a huge plot point, but idk at least don't explicitly describe the situation as excluding the possibility of a wetnurse. "The father or the great grandmother or the neighbor man or the older sibling took and raised the baby completely alone in a cave for a year." Nope. That baby is dead I'm sorry. "The baby was kidnapped shortly after birth by a wizard and hidden away in a secret tower" um quick question was the wizard lactating? "The mother refused to see or touch her child after birth so the baby was left to the care of the ailing grandfather" the grandfather who made the necessary arrangements with women in the neighborhood, right? right? OR THAT GREAT OFFENDER "A newborn baby was left on the doorstep and they brought it in and took care of it no issues" What Are You Going to Feed That Baby. Hello?
Like. It's not impossible, but arrangements are going to have to be made. There are some logistics.
37K notes
·
View notes
thinkin about jodie being all bloody. jodie with fangs. jodie with multiple eyes. jodie with discolored veins all over like she's got darkness beneath her skin.
0 notes
hello and welcome to the uk is a fucking hell country, part 284829494
[alt text:]
Anti-monarchists receive ‘intimidatory’ Home Office letter on new protest laws
Home Office claims timing of new powers, taking effect days before king’s coronation, is coincidental
Ben Quinn, Rajeev Syal and Vikram Dodd
Official warning letters have been sent to anti-monarchists planning peaceful protests at King Charles III’s coronation saying that new criminal offences to prevent disruption have been rushed into law.
Using tactics described by lawyers as “intimidatory”, the Home Office’s Police Powers Unit wrote to the campaign group Republic saying new powers had been brought forward to prevent “disruption at major sporting and cultural events”.
The new law, given royal assent by Charles on Tuesday, means that from Wednesday:
Protesters who block roads, airports and railways could face 12 months behind bars.
Anyone locking on to others, objects or buildings could go to prison for six months and face an unlimited fine.
Police will be able to head off disruption by stopping and searching protesters if they suspect they are setting out to cause chaos.
Jun Pang, a policy and campaigns officer at Liberty, said: “Key measures in the bill will come into force just days before the coronation of King Charles – a significant event in our country’s history that is bound to inspire a wider national conversation and public protests. At the same time, the government are using a statutory instrument to bring draconian measures that the House of Lords threw out of the bill back from the dead, once again evading scrutiny and accountability.
“It’s worrying to see the police handed so many new powers to restrict protest, especially before a major national event. When the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act came into force, the police repeatedly misused them – in part because they simply did not understand them. Similarly, when Queen Elizabeth died, we saw police acting in inappropriate and heavy-handed ways towards protesters that violated their rights.”
Shami Chakrabarti, the former shadow attorney general, said: “During the passage of this illiberal and headline-grabbing legislation, ministers admitted that the new offence of ‘locking on’ is so broad as to catch peaceful protesters who link arms in public.
“Suspicionless stop and search is notorious for racial disparity and it is staggering that more of these provisions have brought into force so soon after Louise Casey’s devastating report [on the Met police]. The home secretary can blast ‘ecowarriors’ but this legislation may be used against anti-poverty and Ukraine solidarity protesters too.”
A statement from the home secretary, Suella Braverman, said: “This legislation is the latest step the government has taken against protesters who use highly disruptive tactics to deliberately delay members of the public, often preventing them from getting to work and hospital, as well as missing loved ones’ funerals.
“The range of new offences and penalties match the seriousness of the threat guerrilla tactics pose to our infrastructure, taxpayers’ money and police time.”
full article here
so just to sum this up, peaceful protesting can now land you in prison for a year and you might face an unlimited fine which i believe is up to £5000, and police can now stop and search you if they believe youre "setting out to cause chaos"
its specifically being put in place right before charles' coronation, but these are now considered criminal offenses so theyre not exclusive to it.
you know, a country where you can be put in prison for a year for peaceful protesting really doesnt sound like a fucking democracy to me.
9K notes
·
View notes
This poll is strictly for autistic people only, and thus does not have a "see results" option. If you're allistic (not autistic) please refrain from voting.
Respectfully, this poll isn't for non-autistic people! It's actually for a slideshow presentation I'm working on for school, therefore please only participate if you are Autistic.
to be clear: this is NOT asking if there SHOULD be a cure for autism, as that is a different issue. this is simply asking, if it WAS possible through safe and ethical means, would you take the opportunity to cure YOURSELF. you're not making the decision for anyone else.
this poll was submitted by an anonymous user. if you have a poll you want to reach a larger audience, feel free to submit it to me, post it and @ me in the replies, or send me the link in an ask!
933 notes
·
View notes