Nicole
she/her/hers
This blog is a little of everything and a lot of inconsistency. I am Queen of the Queue and over-tag everything, so don't be afraid to ask me to tag something for you. I am planning a hobbit hole and you should talk to me about your dream house. Also Tamora Pierce. And The Posterchildren. As well as anything that's weighing you down (I am nearly guaranteed to be on your side).
Profile picture courtesy of Raya

 

cisphobicheterophobe:

"mtf" and "ftm" are incredibly outdated terms that are inaccurate

male means belonging to a man/boy

female means belonging to a woman/girl

trans people who are women were never men

trans people who are men were never women

(unless they feel that they were)

if a trans person doesnt use these labels to describe themselves, dont use them

dont use either of these labels if you really mean “trans woman” “trans man” “cafab trans person” or “camab trans person”

when i see a cis person using these labels to describe trans people i feel like its sensationalistic (oh! they were once a girl and are now a man!) and misgendering. it also tells me that you have probably never talked to a trans person before and have probably only read trans 101s written by cis people (which are 99% of the time grossly inaccurate). which makes me instantly consider you Unsafe To Be Around

egberts:

wordsmythologic:

egberts:

im really pissed that palindrome isnt palindrome backwards

Ah, yes but emordnilap is a word!

An emordnilap is any word that, when spelled backwards, produces another word. Examples of emordnilap pairs include:

  • desserts & stressed
  • drawer & reward
  • gateman & nametag
  • time & emit
  • laced & decal
  • regal & lager

And therefore “emordnilap palindrome” is an emordnilap palindrome.

Which I, for one, think is really frickin’ cool.

dude

Other unreasonable English words: dyslexia, lisp, stutter.

gryffinpoor:

dudemanbropants:

gryffinpoor:

thepreciousthing:

the-ordinary-nerd:

ask-or-rp-with-will-petrisous:

squad16:

finalellipsis:

bestnatesmithever:

What if it bites me and it dies?

that means you’re poisonous. jesus christ, nate, learn to read.

What if it bites itself and I die?

It’s voodoo.

What if it bites me and someone else dies?

That’s correlation, not causation.

what if we bite each other and neither of us die

that’s kinky

oh my god

gryffinpoor:

dudemanbropants:

gryffinpoor:

thepreciousthing:

the-ordinary-nerd:

ask-or-rp-with-will-petrisous:

squad16:

finalellipsis:

bestnatesmithever:

What if it bites me and it dies?

that means you’re poisonous. jesus christ, nate, learn to read.

What if it bites itself and I die?

It’s voodoo.

What if it bites me and someone else dies?

That’s correlation, not causation.

what if we bite each other and neither of us die

that’s kinky

oh my god

sandetiger:

meajoraswrath:

majorasmarx:

allyphobia:

if a trans girls tells you not to call her dude dont fucking call her dude 

Also, to my followers, please tell me if this upsets you.

I call everyone dude and I tend to use it as an exclamation for excitement or surprise, too. Please don’t hesitate to tell me if it bothers you.

^I understand a lot of people use words like “dude” as gender-neutral, and that’s totally fine to do with your CIS friends, but if you have a friend you know is trans* don’t just say it until they specify otherwise? Actually ask them before you use the phrase. Like I say “dude” and “bro” but I stop myself around my non-binary friends and my friends who are transwomen for very obvious reasons, until they state otherwise that it’s okay. Don’t depend on them to tell you it’s not okay. YOU step up and just ask or, you know, don’t say it at all.

Yeah, I try to be careful with ‘dude’ and ‘bro’ and such. One of my problem words is ‘man,’ which I am working on modifying how I use it, and most importantly, when and for whom. Cause that shit matters.

I use “guys” all the time and should probably work on that.

Reclaiming slurs means you’re turning a weapon into armor, not turning that weapon against other, usually more vulnerable members of the same group.

~2spoopy4cis

This is the most brilliant way I have ever heard it explained.

(via inaruri)

On Why The Word Gypsy Is Not Racist

golden-zephyr:

mytsunami:

big-gadje-world:

rawphoenix:

The word gypsy actually comes from the word Egyptian, who gypsies were believed to be descendants of. And despite common belief that the term originated as a racial slur in WW2, it has actually been around and in many forms for several hundred years.

"According to the OED the word was first…

You cited Wikipedia?! Wikipedia?!

While Rroma & Romany were indeed enslaved under “Gypsy” laws, while we were and still are disenfranchised & oppressed under this pehorative exonym, and while WE are saying this word is hurtful and offensive.. you cite Wikifuckingpedia. 

And, it is not “common belief” that the word originated during WW2 because the slurs of continental Europe have completely different origins than “Gypsy”, but are viewed as equally, if not more offensive. 

Unless you are Rroma or Romany, you really don’t have a say on what WE find offensive. 

I.am.so. angry.

JESUS FUCK.

Seriously? The sole basis for this claim was a Wikipedia page?

Okay, so I have some time. Let me refute your ridiculously ill-cited post.

The word gypsy actually comes from the word Egyptian, who gypsies were believed to be descendants of. And despite common belief that the term originated as a racial slur in WW2, it has actually been around and in many forms for several hundred years.

"According to the OED the word was first used in English in 1514, with several more uses in the same century, and that both Edmund Spenser and William Shakespeare used this word.”

"During the 16th and 17th centuries the name was written in various ways: EgipcianEgypcian'gypcian. The word gipsy/gypsy comes from the spellings which had lost the initial capital E, and this is one reason why it is often spelled with the initial g in lowercase.[17] As time elapsed, the notion of ‘the gipsy/gypsy’ altered to include other associated stereotypes such as nomadism andexoticism.[18] John Matthews in The World Atlas of Divination refer to gypsies as “Wise Women.”[19] Colloquially, gipsy/gypsy is used refer to any person perceived by the user as fitting the Gypsy stereotypes.[20]

Actually, the word Gypsy originates from the Middle English gypcian, short for Egipcien. It is ultimately derived, via Middle French and Latin, from the Greek Αἰγύπτιοι (Aigyptioi), i.e. “Egyptians”; cf. Greek γύφτοι (gýftoi), a corruption of the same word. It actually came to English via the Greek, most likely, since the first written record of anyone encountering the Romani was by Simon Simeonis (in his Itinerarium ab Hybernia ad Terram Sanctam) in the early 1300s in Crete, Greece. He called us “accursed of heaven” and “doomed to wander”. He actually used the word “Gypsy” too, so whomever did the referencing for the OED is mightily wrong.

This term DID make it’s way into English when the Roma began to arrive in the UK in the early 1500s and no one has ever disputed that it originated from the erroneous belief that Roma were Egyptian. However, they were first mislabeled in other European countries they made their way into.

The word came with stereotypes attached. They were not added later. As Simon Simeonis (you remember that dude from the 1300s) called us, “accursed of Heaven, nomad and outcast, who after the thirtieth day wander from field to field with little, oblong, black, low tents, after the fashion of the Arabs, and from cave to cave, because the place inhabited by them becomes after the above-mentioned time full of vermin and other filth, in the presence of which it is impossible to live.” (quote taken from the primary source of the Itinerarium ab Hybernia ad Terram Sanctam).

The word Gypsy has been misapplied to multiple groups for hundreds of years. Including Irish Travellers, Sottish Travellers, Jenische, and others. The word has always been used as a slur, since as soon as we arrived in many countries we were subjected to death threats, slavery, branding, hangings, forced sterilization, forced assimilation and all this prior to WWI.

Brief timeline prior to WWI (I utilize the correct word Roma/Romani here, since these actions ONLY APPLY TO THE ROMA):

1385: The first recorded transaction of Romani slaves is recorded in Romania.

1416-­‐1504: The Roma are expelled from Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Spain, and France.

1505: First record of Roma in Britain

1510: Switzerland imposes the death penalty.

1512-­‐1538: The Roma are expelled from Catalonia, Bavaria, Portugal, Sweden, England, Wales, and Denmark.

1538: Portugal deports Roma to the Colonies.

1544: England deports Roma to Norway.

1554: First law making being Roma in England a crime punishable by death.

1589: Denmark imposes the death penalty to all Roma.

1596: 106 men and women condemned to death in England for being Roma.

1637: Sweden imposes the death penalty to all Roma.

1721: Emperor Karl VI orders the extermination of all Roma in the Austro­‐Hungarian Empire.

1728: Last living Romani hunted down in Holland. Some tried to escape via ship to America. Rotterdam port authority chased them down and forced all Roma to jump overboard.

1547-­‐1749: The Roma are expelled from Norway, Bohemia, Poland, Lithuania, Scotland, Denmark (again), Norway (again), Belarus, and Sweden (again).

1758: Empress Maria Theresa begins a program to assimilate all Roma by force.

1812: Nomadic Romani in Finland are confined to workhouses.

1822: Turnpike Act is introduced. All Roma camping along the roadside are fined.

1830: Germany begins a program of removing Romani children from their homes to be fostered with non-Roma families.

1848: Transylvania frees the Roma from 500 years of slavery, followed by Moldavia in 1855 and Wallachia in 1856.

1849: Denmark allows Romani back into the country.

1868: Richard Liebich coins the phrase “lives unworthy of life.” This is later used by the Nazis to destroy the Roma alongside the Jews in the Holocaust.

1872 – 1899: Roma are expelled from Belgium, Denmark (again), and Germany.

1890: Germany organizes a conference on “The Gypsy Scum.” The “Central Office for Fighting the Gypsy Nuisance” gets its start there.

1906: France hands out identity cards to all Roma.

…. So you can clearly see from the BEGINNING the word was a slur. It did not change with the arrival of Roma in the UK in the early 1500s.

Now onto your bullshit about English Law:

Use in English law

Gipsy has several developing and overlapping meanings under English Law. Under the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960, ‘gipsies’ are defined as “persons of nomadic habit of life, whatever their race or origin, but does not include members of an organised group of travelling showmen, or persons engaged in travelling circuses, travelling together as such.”[34] This definition includes such groups as New Age Travellers, as well as Irish Travellers and Romany.[35][36]

Gipsies of Romany origins have been a recognised ethnic group for the purposes of Race Relations Act 1976 since Commission for Racial Equality v Dutton 1989 and Irish Travellers in England and Wales since O’Leary v Allied Domecq 2000 (having already gained recognition in Northern Ireland in 1997)

- wiki

UNDER ENGLISH LAW you can refer to yourself as a gypsy as long as you are a nomadic traveler. And yet it is still recognized as an ethnic group anyways. So obviously, there has been a lot of confusion over the word for a long time. But under no circumstance was it invented as a ‘genocidal slur’. It’s origin in fact had NO negative connotation whatsoever, unless you consider the word Egyptian to be so.

As I’ve already stated, the origins of the word WERE a slur (Egyptian was in reference to our dark hair, skin and eyes - this is where the phrase “black as a Gypsy” came from).

The 1960 Caravan Sites (Control and Development) Act stopped new private sites for Roma being built. Eviction and harassment of Roma reaches crisis point. The 1968 (amended) Caravan Sites Act insists that from 1970, local authorities should provide sites. It’s never enforced.

1972, the government exempts many councils from building sites and in 1994, the government’s “Criminal Justice Act” abolishes the Caravan Sites Act, leaving more than 5,000 families with no legal home.

As for your legal definition:

The term ‘travelling people’ is one often used in both the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. It can include:

  • ‘Gypsies’ who may be of English, Welsh or Scottish descent, and who have Romany ancestry. ‘Gypsies’ have a specific meaning for the purposes of planning and local authority law, which is considered below.
  • ‘Irish Travellers’ who are a nomadic Irish ethnic group with a separate identity, culture, language and history. There are many Irish Travellers resident in Britain for all or part of the year.
  • ‘Scottish Travellers’ who like Irish Travellers have musical traditions, language and other histories that date back at least to the twelfth century.
  • The Roma people who have moved to Britain from Central and Eastern Europe (of which Britain’s Romany Gypsies are members).
  • People with a long family history of travelling because they work with fairgrounds and circuses (also known as ‘Travelling Show people’).
  • So-called ‘New Travellers’. Some of whom may be second or third generation Travellers and/or may have Gypsy ancestry.

The Commission for Racial Equality only upheld that “Romany Gypsies” were an ethnic group within the meaning of the Race Relations Act of 1976, with regard to their shared history, geographical origin, distinct customs and language.  It wasn’t until more recently that Irish Travellers were recognized as a separate ethnic group (O’Leary v Allied Domecq). And eventually in 2008, the MacLennan v Gypsy Traveller Education and Information Project led to a landmark ruling that Scottish Gypsy/Travellers are a distinct ethnic group bringing them within the protection of the Race Relations Act. Other travelling groups CANNOT claim such protection NOR can they claim separate ethnic status.

Legally, the British government DOES this to systematically discriminate against Roma and Travellers. By writing us into law as “Gypsies” we are all lumped in one pot, effectively erasing our different cultures, languages, and lifestyles. This was very effective for the government, as they were able to limit our access to hitch/pitch sites in one fell swoop (since “Gypsy” covered everyone from Travellers, through the Roma, to showmen and “new age”) - just as Hitler did not discriminate between “Roma” and “Sinte” (or the other groups, such as Jenische and Manouche) who were targeted as “Zigeuneur”.

Even (perhaps especially) within the law, the word has a VERY long history of being utilized as a veiled racial slur. The British KNEW what they were doing when they hard coded it into so many laws from the beginning and legal recognition of our minority status has differed across the UK.

A report published in 2004 showed Gypsy and Traveller communities are the most at risk health group in the UK with the lowest life expectancy and the highest child mortality rate (University of Sheffield 2004).  Persistent inequalities faced by Gypsy, Roma and Traveller pupils are evidenced in continued lower academic attainment (National Literacy Trust 2011) and research has been dedicated to exploring the issues that impact on educational outcomes (Department for Education 2009).  

A research study, published by the Equality and Human Rights Commission in 2009, presents evidence of Gypsies’ and Travellers’ experiences of inequalities in a wide range of areas and has highlighted “the extent to which many of their experiences remain invisible and ignored within wider agendas” (Cemlyn et al 2009, p.252). The report covers the experiences of Gypsies and Travellers in England, Scotland and Wales.

Gypsies and Travellers were highlighted as the minority group about which people felt least positively in a survey profiling the nature of prejudice in England (Stonewall 2003). Media reporting of stories about Gypsies and Travellers have usually reinforced negative stereotypes, a situation exacerbated by figures of authority (Power 2004, Commission for Racial Equality 2006). In their media analysis, Amnesty International in Scotland found a disproportionate amount of scrutiny of Scottish Gypsy Travellers in the Scottish media (Amnesty International 2012b). Nurses have an important role in challenging the prejudices faced by Gypsy and Traveller communities (Van Cleemput 2010). 

I did not mention WWII in this reply once (except for a passing remark regarding Hitler), yet, I have systematically proven your “wiki” entry to be wrong. The word was and still is a racial and ethnic slur, no matter its origins or whether its hard-coded in archaic laws. It wasn’t until the early 1970s that the First World Romani Congress were able to legally and formally declare that Roma should be our official appellation. The law (and the press) have been slow to follow. They aren’t keen on upholding the rights of a minority that they clearly have little affection for.

The word “Gypsy” is utilized so much within the UK (and other EU countries) not because we’re wrong and it’s not considered a slur, but rather because in order to gain legal recognition organizations MUST use the legal definition (which at this time stands at “Gypsy, Roma, Traveller”.

And lastly, your final shit in the pot:

So people really need to stop fucking saying the word gypsy is just as bad as the n word. If people wanted to MOCK the gypsies in World War 2, they would have given them another name - like how they called the Jews untermensch (subhuman) & Judencheisse (Jewshit).

It seems quite clear to me that the Nazis did not need to create any other word, since even before WWI the term “Gypsy” was adequately offensive and derogatory. They did not call us by our OWN name (for example, Jew/Jewish). And trust me. There were plenty of words added in front or behind the word “Zigeuneur” in WWII. Not to mention the fact that you clearly have no idea of how the words untermensch and schiesse were applied during that time, nor other words that were specifically used against other groups (such as the Roma and Sinti).

As one final piece of advice,

NEVER TELL SOMEONE TO WHOM SUCH A WORD APPLIES THAT IT WAS NEVER NOR IS NOT A RACIAL OR ETHNIC SLUR.

(Source: rawpowerhouse)

concernedresidentofbakerstreet:

okay woWIE YOU GUYS REALLY NEED TO WATCH THIS BECAUSE PANTENE DID A COMMERCIAL ABOUT HOW SHIT LABELS AGAINST WOMEN ARE AND ITS JUST SO GREAT WOWIE

D&D Stats Explained with Tomatoes

raktajino-hot:

corruptionpoints:

mindchildofmadness submits:

Strength is being able to crush a tomato.

Dexterity is being able to dodge a tomato.

Constitution is being able to eat a bad tomato.

Intelligence is knowing a tomato is a fruit.

Wisdom is knowing not to put a tomato in a fruit salad.

Charisma is being able to sell a tomato based fruit salad.

(Source)

image

…trolling used to be pretty funny and almost entirely harmless. Trolling, despite the modern usage, does not mean “the act of pissing somebody off and laughing about their anger.” It is “the act of pissing somebody off BASED ON SOMETHING COMPLETELY MEANINGLESS and laughing about their MISPLACED anger.” It isn’t considered trolling to leave a comment full of racial epithets and laugh when people “don’t get it.” It is trolling if you leave a comment insisting on the wrong information about something irrelevant – how many runes are on a Stargate, for example (everybody knows its 12) – and wait for the ONE guy that just can’t let the transgression pass. If you start a fake fight with Prof. Stargate, dragging him deeper and deeper until hopefully, finally, even he has to stop and think “wait a minute, this is ridiculous,” that is trolling. That’s the difference: No actual harm is caused, and even the victim can eventually get in on the joke. “Trolling” isn’t referring to hiding behind a fortification and trying to hurt people like the mythical creature. It’s referring to the style of fishing – you drag bait across the bottom hoping to get a rare bite. It’s not ‘bait’ if you’re earnestly spouting your misogynistic beliefs and somebody gets upset. There’s nothing funny about entirely justified anger.

cobrall:

i can’t stress enough how language is defined by its use

you’re not really misusing a word if you’re using it in its most popular definition because there’s no way i could tell anyone that something is “terrific” and have EVERYONE KNOW THAT I MEAN IT INSPIRES TERROR GOD YOU’RE ALL SOOOOO STUPID

clinging to archaic definitions and being a language purist in general is so dumb for real like 50% of our language now is butchered latin mixed with shakespearean chatspeak

daensonnet:

friendlyangryfeminist:

Also, important about why GSM/GSRM is an incredibly flawed term to refer to the LGBT+ community:

Lars Ullerstam, who coined the term in his 1966 book “The Erotic Minorities” included and defended pedophilia and incest - equating it with homosexuality and transgender people.

So yeah! REALLY FUCKING AWFUL TERM TO USE TO REFER TO THE LGBT+ COMMUNITY

:((((

(Source: fauxcyborg)