You know what the most frustrating thing about the vegans throwing a fit over my “Humans aren’t Parasites” post is? I really wasn’t trying to make a point about animal agriculture. Honestly, the example about subsistence hunting isn’t the main point. That post was actually inspired by thoughts I’ve been having about the National Park system and environmentalist groups.
See, I LOVE the National Parks. I always have a pass. I got to multiple parks a year. I LOVE them, and always viewed them as this unambiguously GOOD thing. Like, the best thing America has done.
BUT, I just finished reading this book called “I am the Grand Canyon” all about the native Havasupai people and their fight to gain back their rights to the lands above the canyon rim. Historically, they spent the summer months farming in the canyon, and then the winter months hunter-gathering up above the rim. When their reservation was made though, they lost basically all rights to the rim land (They had limited grazing rights to some of it, but it was renewed year to year and always threatened, and it was a whole thing), leading to a century long fight to get it back.
And in that book there are a couple of really poignant anecdotes- one man talks about how park rangers would come harass them if they tried to collect pinon nuts too close to park land- worried that they would take too many pinon nuts that the squirrels wanted. Despite the fact that the Havasupai had harvested pinon nuts for thousands and thousands of years without ever…like…starving the squirrels.
There’s another anecdote of them seeing the park rangers hauling away the bodies of dozens of deer- killed in the park because of overpopulation- while the Havasupai had been banned from hunting. (Making them more and more reliant on government aid just to survive the winter months.)
They talk about how they would traditionally carve out these natural cisterns above the rim to catch rainwater, and how all the animals benefitted from this, but it was difficult to maintain those cisterns when their “ownership” of the land was so disputed.
So here you have examples of when people are forcibly separated from their ecosystem and how it hurts both those people and the ecosystem.
And then when the Havasupai finally got legislation before Congress to give them ownership of the rim land back- their biggest opponent was the Parks system and the Sierra Club. The Sierra Club (a big conservation group here in the US) ran a huge smear campaign against these people on the belief that any humans owning this land other than the park system (which aims at conservation, even while developing for recreation) was unacceptable.
And it all got me thinking about how, as much as I love the National Parks, there are times when its insistence that nature be left “untouched” (except, ya know, for recreation) can actually harm both the native people who have traditionally been part of those ecosystems AND potentially the ecosystems themselves. And I just think there’s a lot of nuance there about recognizing that there are ways for us to be in balance with nature, and that our environmentalism should respect that and push for sustainability over preserving “pristine” human-less landscapes. Removing ourselves from nature isn’t the answer.
But apparently the idea that subsistence hunting might actually not be a moral catastrophe really set the vegans off. Woopie.
no seriously, tell me where you’re from and if you read asterix and obelix as a kid because I thought those comics were universal
there’s something so funny about 10 people in a row reblogging this saying they’re from India and loved them as a kid, and then one person from India reblogging with a rant about westerners assuming their experiences are universal and “of course i dont know them”
oh to be a nun in 1350 enjoying quiet time and gardening and having lots of lesbian sex and then dying at the ripe old age of 36
Life expectancy statistics measure the average age of death. Because infant/childhood mortality was so incredibly high until recently, it really dragged down that average. If you exclude infant/childhood mortality from your statistic, you’ll see that humans (that survive childhood) have consistently lived into their 70s, meaning if you were a woman that survived childhood and never had to go through pregnancy, you may well get a good 50+ years of lesbian sex and gardening!
Reblog for a good 50+ years of lesbian sex and gardening
People who’ve been to the gynecologist outside of Germany, I have a question.
Is it not considered normal elsewhere that they chat with you about random stuff during a vaginal exam?
I just read a listicle about “weird stuff to expect in Germany” and they singled this out. Which fair enough, I can see that not being a thing elsewhere, but the list was also filled with a bunch of stuff that’s definitely also common elsewhere and stuff that’s not at all common but just happens sometimes (people have FIREPLACES in their home! There are VENDING MACHINES for PIZZA!)
Thank you @formerlyknownas-delight for
- consistently but gently telling me I’m crazy for thinking my cat has Stockholm syndrome
- appreciating my judginess
- making delightful things that make the world a brighter place
- providing so much footage of small floofy friends
Let! That! Baby! Eat!!!!!!
I know it was a joke a whole back to say that shark skin is as touch as sandpaper, but this video is actually a great example of how the smoothness of a shark can make it quite difficult to get a grip on them.
They threw my mans out of the boat like a bag of potatoes.
Someone replied to one of our recent posts:
“Agree with most of this but would like to point out that a part of the push to make Pride less sexual is to make it a safe space for queer children and to help straights realize being queer isn’t just about fetishes.“
(The person is not tagged because I don’t want to send any hate to them, and the reply isn’t being responded to directly because Tumblr has made that near impossible)
When I came out, my mom told me I couldn’t tell my little sister because it was too sexual.
Later, I moved to the “Big City”, what I hoped to be a haven for queer people. I was with one of the first queer friends my wife and I had made in the city, we had just watched their wrestling debut, and had gone to their apartment afterwards with a group of strangers. Some this group our friend had told us behind the scenes were much more right wing causing our friend to keep parts of their queer identity under wraps.
Our friend suddenly turned to us and began scolding us, telling me and my wife that one of their coworkers at the city Pride Centre had approached them and told them that she had seen me and my wife kiss, and we needed to cut it out with the PDA.
I nodded in front of this group of strangers and when I could no longer hold my tears back I excused myself to the bathroom, cried and waited there until it was no longer obvious I had been crying. We hurried out.
The kiss in question was a goodbye kiss, as my wife went back to campus, and I don’t remember it. I have always been rather shy with PDA and don’t think it could have been much more than a peck. The coworker later told our friend that she was going through a bad breakup and our friend later explained that this was actually the reason for the complaint.
I have never felt safe in queer spaces since. Talking to the same friend later, they asked me and my wife to chaperone the Queer Prom and without thinking I assured them we would make sure not to hold hands or dance while we were there so it would stay “a safe space for children”.
When I was a child, I stumbled into a pride parade and was shocked and upset by the men in gold short shorts. My uncle apologized for letting me see something so sexual and awful.
Every single thing queer people do is “about fetishes” to people who hate queerness. Being less sexual is not going to change that.
I had seen short shorts before. I would see them again, and no one would apologize for that. The thing I was being kept “safe” from was not overly sexual behaviour, and considering there are already laws against indecent exposure, the same is true for children now.
Keeping theoretical children safe has been the justification for the continuing genocide against queer people all around the globe, so this rhetoric is not harmless. It has been used to put queer people in labour camps and slaughter them.
I have nothing to prove to “straights” and I was the “queer child” who was horrified by the pride parades. As an adult, the discomfort I felt at seeing queer people existing happily and authentically in short shorts, is not something I needed to be kept safe from.
This nonsense is nothing more or less than the same moral panic that has killed queer people throughout history.
Someone put this on a goddamn neon sign.
I keep seeing posts about how you shouldn’t round up your payment at checkout “for charity” because the company takes the money, gives in their own name, and then receives a tax break for the donation.
This is incorrect. It’s just plain wrong information.
Because it’s illegal for a company to claim collected donations on their taxes, since they give you a receipt that proves you can claim it on yours. They are considered a collection agent – the corporate equivalent of a firefighter with a boot soliciting on the sidewalk.
And the sentiment is potentially fucking nonprofits out of serious change.
So here’s how it works. When you make a purchase you’re asked if you’d like to round up your price, say $22.70, to $23 and give that extra 30 cents to charity. When you choose yes, the company adds that as a special charge, and transfers the amount to a processing company. The processing company disburses many small gifts in one big chunk to the nonprofit, so that the nonprofit doesn’t get ten thousand transactions of thirty cents. Over the course of a couple of years, campaigns like this can raise millions for the nonprofit.
So where’s the catch? you’re thinking. Capitalism doesn’t allow kindness like this to rampage unchecked!
Well, you’re kinda right. For one thing, there’s something called the Halo Effect, where companies get a huge PR boost from this giving. People feel better about themselves and the place they give, when they give this way. That’s why companies do it, pure and simple. It’s cheap, built-in positive messaging.
The companies aren’t deducting it (it’d be chump change to them anyway tbh) but you can. You can literally deduct the thirty cents you gave at Jersey Mike’s off your very own taxes, if you keep the receipt. But unless you’re giving more than $6K to charity each year ($12K if you’re filing jointly!) then there’s no point keeping that receipt, because before that threshold you won’t get a tax break for charitable giving anyway.
One significant benefit of giving at checkout is that the nonprofit doesn’t get your name or address, so you never go on a mailing list. If you give an average of 30 cents twice a week when you buy a soda at the gas station, over the course of a year you’ll have given over $30 commitment-free. Sweet deal.
Here’s what most people think is the catch: between three and seven percent of the money given goes to that processing company I mentioned. Because they have to, you know, process that money, which comes with expenses like software, customer support, servers, bank fees, etc.
However. Three to seven percent? That’s nothing. A good fundraiser working for a nonprofit costs, in salary, roughly 20% of what they raise. For every dollar they earn, they bring in about $5 from donors. Round-up campaigns raise $5 and charge you 25 cents for it and require almost no work from the charity – that money just shows up. And even if you didn’t give at the checkout, if you give online we pay a processing fee to the place processing THAT payment. If you give by check or cash, we still have to pay people to count, record, and deposit those payments. Giving money costs money. That’s just the way it is.
2. Unless you actually are giving elsewhere, if you choose not to round-up, then you’re just…chest pounding. You’re pretending to stick it to the man when really you’re just not making a charitable gift at all. If you do give elsewhere that’s great, keep up the good work, I’m not talking to you. And if you can’t afford to give, I’m really sorry, I want you to keep your money and I’m also not talking to you. As we know, thirty cents adds up. I couldn’t give for several years, and it’s a point of pride now to always be able to hit the round-up button without doing any math.
But if you could give and aren’t giving somewhere…then no offense but you have no skin in this game and you need to sit down and let people who give a shit get on with their work.
Because an additional truth is that some people only remember to give when they’re asked but they HATE TO BE ASKED, except at checkout. And some people only give if they feel like they’re giving insignificantly relative to their income – like thirty cents at checkout. These campaigns are nearly-free, super-easy money for us from people who probably wouldn’t otherwise give. They raise our profile, too, so that people who have given at checkout think of us when they DO remember to give (like oh, around the holidays, which are fast impending).
In the end, I suppose I’m really just begging people, as a whole, for about the seventh or eighth year running, to stop coming to charitable giving from the standpoint of “Well whaddaya give me for it? Where’s the catch? How do I know you’ll do the best with my money? Can you prove you aren’t a scam?”
I know that most of you, most of the time, come to any relationship with an inherent assumption of good faith – from tv shows to friendships to Etsy purchases to pet ownership. You’re not deeply suspicious by nature! But this lingering hostility towards charitable giving, where the immediate assumption is one of bad faith, is really harmful to people who are attempting to do good work. An extremely small fraction of the nonprofits that want your funding are scams, religiously sketchy, or deeply negligent when it comes to how your money is eventually spent. Most are doing their best and many are putting up with a lot of unnecessary fucking side-eye while they do it.
So try to downshift from “Who will scam me the least” to “Who would I like to help the most?” and give accordingly. Whether that’s a local pet shelter, a toy or blanket drive, a national cancer organization, your friend’s top surgery gofundme, or the woman standing in traffic with the cardboard sign. Your blood pressure (and mine too, for that matter) will go way down.