hey, i'm jill perkins. welcome to jillieperkins.com, a blog/portfolio.
one of the most detrimental things ever said to me as a child was, "you're too young to be anxious/depressed." children who feel anxiety and depression are valid. stop invalidating children because you think they don't have a reason to worry unless they pay bills or have kids.
if churches become taxable, then all non-profit organizations will have to be taxed. to tax churches, government would need to have the (currently unconstitutional) authority to audit and regulate churches. taxation would benefit large churches and ministries and severely harm smaller ones. even if we do tax churches, churches will do what other businesses do - they’ll increase expenditures in order to reduce taxable income.
first, churches are 501c3 organizations, just like most non-profit organizations. museum? 501c3. charitable foundation? 501c3. rick james appreciation society? 501c3 (or c4 or c7). think tank? 501c3. bowling league? 501c3. there are many different kinds of 501c organizations, but 501c3 is by far the most common. if you want to tax churches, then you have to tax all of those other organizations.
but we could just single out churches, right? wrong! for one thing, defining "church" is impossible. the minute you say "churches cannot be c3 organizations", what is to stop them from simply calling themselves something else? throw a few paintings on the wall and they're an art museum. read the bible now and then and they're a literary club. provide information about how to live a better life and they're an educational organization. get together a couple days a week and they are a social club. if you make it taxable to call themselves a "church", they can just pretend to be some other type of organization.
second, singling out churches for taxation could not pass constitutional muster. the 1st amendment prohibits the government from creating laws that favor or disfavor, endorse or oppose, religion(s). prohibiting organizations from obtaining legal non-profit status on the basis of religion is precisely the kind of thing the 1st amendment prohibits. if you eliminated (legislatively) non-profit status for all c3 organizations, that would be legal. but making a rule that disfavors religious organizations because they are religious organizations would be a blatant, explicit violation of the 1st amendment.
third, as an atheist, i am glad the government cannot do this, because a government that can legally disfavor religious organizations for tax purposes is a government that can legally discriminate against atheists on the basis that they are atheists.
finally, let's remember that "non-profit" mostly just means the organizations revenue does not unduly inure to the benefit of individuals or owners. it means they don't have profits that get distributed to executives or shareholders. that doesn't mean people cannot earn a salary, even a very good salary. they can, and they have to pay taxes on those salaries, just like other c3 organizations. a lot of the super-wealthy pastors you see are earning a lot of their money independently of the church itself, via books and speeches and things like that. they pay taxes on that income. what they don't pay taxes on are the non-existent "profits", because churches do not, in legal/accounting terms, have profits. they have revenue, maybe even a lot of revenue, but revenue and profit are not the same thing.
also there are a couple legally feasible changes that could be made. whether they are politically feasible, or good policy, may be another matter. it might be possible to eliminate the broad property or sales tax exemption, but this would need to be done for all exempt non-profit organizations. legally, it is feasible. but politically? good luck getting legislators to impose taxes not only on churches, but also on non-profit universities, museums and hospitals.
its been a while since i've posted here, i had a baby on jan 9th and have been quite busy. ill be updating more often from now on.
i get a lot of questions about my tattooed skin, and although i am only moderately tattooed (so far) i think it's important to recognize that most of the time, those with tattooed skin are collecting artwork as a form of self-care.
for the longest time i wanted to get tattoos that were beautiful, that would adorn my body and make it a beautiful place... and i wanted to explore that idea because if you're getting tattoos to do that, then you're countering an idea that your body is not a place you want to be in.
you've clearly been misinformed if you believe planned parenthood only performs abortions. if you believe that, you are willfully disregarding facts to propogate the delusion that pp is a murder factory and not what it actually is- a valuable resource for prenatal care, mammograms, std screening, and unwanted pregnancy via free birth control, and i am blinded by the headlights of your vacuous crap.
also: FEDERAL FUNDING FOR PLANNED PARENTHOOD IS ALREADY NOT USED FOR ABORTION. I REPEAT. FEDERAL FUNDING FOR PLANNED PARENTHOOD IS NOT. USED. FOR. ABORTION. so, cutting federal funding for pp just revokes affordable access to the valuable resources i've listed above. this means MORE unwanted pregancy, spread of HIV and other stds, lack of access to prenatal care for impoverished pregnant women, and the unnecessary advancement of cancer in women who could have otherwise caught it early with a routine check up. is that what you want? really?
am i pro-abortion? no. no one is happy they've had to have an abortion. no woman chooses an abortion as a form of birth control. abortions cost anywhere between 300 to 950 dollars. no one is passing up condoms because "they feel weird" with the notion that they can simply run out and get an abortion in case their reckless behavior results in a fertilized egg. i feel for women who, like myself, have received an abortion. it is a life-changing event that no one wants to happen. i received mine at a private clinic, all out of pocket. i'm so grateful that i had access to a safe and legal abortion. i want that access to be available to my daughter if, heaven forbid, she finds herself pregnant in an unsatisfactory situation.
women are NOT having abortions full term. late term abortions occur when the mother's life is in danger. an extremely small percentage of women choose to have an abortion past 20 weeks gestation. it is illegal to have an abortion in most states when the child is viable outside the womb (generally 24 to 26 weeks.) of ALL the planned parenthoods in Dallas TX, only ONE offers abortion services.
a baby is a human life. a fetus is not concious of its existence and therefore cannot be compared to an already born infant. if your argument is strictly emotional and deeply rooted in your religious beliefs, keep in mind that those are beliefs others do not share, beliefs that have no place meshed into political decisions.
i am scared for all women that they will not be able to have a say in their bodily autonomy. that absolutely HORRIFIES me. and i am further horrified that a woman could have no issue having someone police her uterus, or her daughter's, sister's, or granddaughter's... allowing the government to forcibly pop her or her loved one's uterus like a pimple in order to shame them for having sex thus thrusting them (and their unborn children) into a life doomed by a perpetual state of poverty and victimhood.
that moment you realize you haven't genuinely loved anyone since the highschool boyfriend you fucked over and couldn't win back but now you're almost 25 and you've wasted every guys time you've dated /married since then in a pathetic attempt to recreate the happiness and love you once felt deeply and start to think maybe karma actually does exist because you finally meet someone with whom your feelings are entirely genuine but that person is experiencing the same emotional disconnect from romantic relationships you've felt for years as a result of his personal heartbreak and now you're the one whose time is being wasted.
if you were wondering if shit catches up with past lovers that have hurt you, the answer might be yes.
thomas the train
it seems kind of unhealthy that the engines in thomas the train are all only happy when they are considered "really useful." seriously. what kind of message does that send? it suggests to me that they have been brainwashed by the fearsome tuxedoed railway overlord "sir topham hatt" to accept the bonds of slavery without question. i'm sure off-mic george carlin would say things like, "thomas, open your coal hole. time for you to understand what REALLY happens to bad engines on this island." and why does sir topham hatt invest in so many trains when the single helicopter he owns can do pretty much everything the trains can't? he should purchase more helicopters and rid himself of these eerily anthropomorphic trains that disobey orders and are dangerously neurotic and over-competitive with one another. james and gordon are total cocks.
someone get me out of this house.
this is not a biased third wave feminist rant, it is a genuine concern that women are purchasing firearms for the wrong reasons.
pink guns are sexist because they say to women "attention females: if you're feeling disenfranchised lately, get yourself a hot pink AR-15 rifle and blast off a few rounds at a local shooting range. within the hour, you'll be a new woman: tough, strong, empowered." pink guns are sexist because they were mostly created to get women involved in the NRA. only a fraction of the NRA is female, and pink guns have increased that number. it's a marketing ploy.
pink guns are dangerous because buying a gun based on its aesthetic rather than its shootability, reliability, caliber, etc is unwise. in a situation where you need to shoot someone, you will want a gun that can defend you, not a gun that looks pretty.
pink guns are dangerous because they make it difficult for police officers to determine whether or not someone is armed or has a toy. nerf makes an entire line of pink toy guns.
pink guns are dangerous because a gun which resembles a toy is an extreme safety hazard for children. there have been instances of children shooting off guns because they thought the gun was a toy. if toy guns arent allowed resemble real guns, real guns should definitely not be allowed to resemble toy guns.
new year same me
to everyone who is sad about a few celebrities dying in the year 2016:
i was unwillingly divorced with a child less than a year old, had to move back in with my parents like a giant lady child, was impregnated out of wedlock (my own fault) by someone who treated me horribly, was fired for being pregnant by someone who got her job because of my glowing recommendation from a company i worked for for almost 2 years, and lost almost $20,000 to said divorce and a failed business venture. 2016 was easily the worst year of my life. to make myself feel better, i found a list full of wonderful things that happened last year and fact checked it. here are a bunch of reasons to not continue facebooking and tweeting from your handheld computer in the comfort of your air conditioned home with running water and flushable toilets about how 2016 was the worst year ever:
there is an ebola vaccine now, child mortality is down across the globe, there is a +9% survival rate in pacreatic cancer sufferers, the gene responsible for als was found, volunteers in india planted 50 million trees in just 24 hours, suicide rates are down globally, the ozone layer is repairing itself, wild tigers numbers are up for the first time in 100 years, wild wolves are back in europe, wild salmon are spawning in the connecticut river for the first time since the american revolution, giant pandas, columbian white tailed deer, green sea turtles, manatees, and humpback whales are all no longer endangered, sea world is no longer breeding captive killer whales, global malaria is down by 60%, measels was completely eradicated from the americas, 93% of the world's children learned to read and write (the highest percentage in human history), norway committed 0 deforestation, china plans to be completely renewable by 2020 and has a global plan for by 2050, and it was china's most generous year ever in charity and aid at $15 billion.
on another positive note, i am giving birth to a daughter in a few days and made all a's this semester. take a second to think about the good things that happened to you and the world instead of focusing on all the shit that inevitably happens in 365 days. do not trick yourself into thinking that a certain date on a calendar (that has only been used for the last 400 years or so) means squat about your existence on this mortal plane.
i usually don't care about celebrity bs but the whole "let's blame mariah carey for the new years fiasco" stuff is starting to annoy me.
1. first, stop crying about lip syncing. if lip syncing was the performance, that's what the performance was meant to be. this is not up to mariah. many artists do this, and while it is somewhat ingenuine, performances like this one really aren't truly live music. they're a theatrical show.
2. it takes a team of people to put on a show like this one. mariah is just the face of the show. the answer to who is to blame for this performance's demise lies with the tech team for not making absolutely sure mariah had the tracks necessary to complete her performance.
3. no, she couldn't have still sung the song if she couldn't hear the pre-recorded background track. the speakers were facing away from her into a crowd of thousands of screaming people. her recording wasn't playing in her earpiece meaning she had no track to sing a capella to. she couldn't have sung a capella because the track we were hearing would have conflicted with her a capella performance. here is a statement released by a member of the tech team:
"because many of you know where i was/who i was with last night, and because the headlines and comments can be so vicious, i want to tell you what i saw. because of sound, mixing, and logistical constraints, a performance like this needs a pre-recorded background track; the talent typically "sings along" with this background track, which they hear through their in-ear monitor(s). when the live performance started last night, it was clear she didn't have audio in her ear monitors. not being able to sing along to an accompaniment she couldn't hear, she pulled the ear monitors out, but there was still nothing in real-time that allowed her to hear the track in sync. thus the "lip sync flub" and the talking instead of singing...it was, at that point an unwinable situation. abc continued to play the backing track live, so going rogue/singing a capella was not a workable option. it was bad, yes. but this was not some unprepared diva moment (and i assure you we were all fully sober, having been holed up in the hotel all day without bubbles to drink). despite what you may have heard, she did come to rehearsal, on time and attentively. her monitor didn't work then, and she told them. when she came to the live interview with seacrest, she again said there was no audible sound in her monitor, and said afterward that she couldn't even clearly hear his questions. despite this, she was again sent onstage without fully working sound, and an avoidable technical glitch is now a headline out of context. i'm personally disappointed that the network/show didn't release a statement, but i have to say that i appreciate mc's social media comment; that's her, in spirit and attitude. it was a heartbreaking event, even if it was a fitting end to 2016. onward."
honestly if it were me i would have refused to work under those conditions and would not have gone on stage.
morticia and gomez addams had the ultimate marriage. they mutually respected one another, exhibited solid communication, didnt "settle" after having children, were deeply affectionate, clearly had wonderful sex, were superb parents who encouraged their children to be true to themselves and to question the world around them, were gracious hosts, graceful dancers, and consistently nurtured their uniquely romantic connection.
holiday psa! december 25th has nothing to do with jesus' birthday. according to the bible, he was born sometime between the spring and early october... probably september, but definitely not december 25th. in the year 336 the roman emperor constantine was trying to get everyone to ditch paganism and make christianity the mainstream religion. at that time, the biggest ancient festival was saturnalia, a festival celebrating the god saturn. saturnalia lasted just over a week and started on december 17th, so today would be one of the last days. the ancient romans chose this time to celebrate saturn because it was during winter solstice. constantine decided that because everyone already celebrated a big ass festival at this time of the year, replacing the holiday with a christian one would make for a smoother transition into christianity. at this time, most people worshipped multiple deities and were called pagans. constantine made it seem as though paganism was an evil religion, when in reality all a pagan is, is "a person holding religious beliefs other than those of the main world religions." that's basically everyone who isn't jewish, muslim, christian, etc. these kind of extremisms are exactly how christianity was able to take over the norm by demonizing those who didn't want to convert. christmas also adopted several symbolisms that have nothing to do with jesus. christmas trees decorated saturnian temples, mistletoe was used by ancient druids who believed it had magical powers, and gifts were given during the winter solstice as a celebration of the upcoming season. none of that had anything to do with jesus, it was pagan as fuck. christmas was even outlawed in america when the puritans first came to the new world (now america) because they knew it was pagan. it didn’t become kosher again until the 1680s when companies realized that giving gifts was a profitable practice. what about santa? he's based off a real guy named st. nicholas who was a bishop in the church of turkey (not a white guy.) one day he anonymously gave 3 bags of gold to a poor family and after that people made up this legend that all anonymous gifts come from some guy names st. nicholas. now he lives at the north pole even though he's totally from the middle east. weird. santa's gift giving was supposed to be a noble act of helping the poor, but in the 1800s companies realized that making it about children was far more profitable. people would rather buy gifts for cute little kids than poor people. super jesus-y right? nope. and that, my friends, is how your beloved corporate capitalist holiday we all call christmas was born! happy saturnalia!
war on christmas
this is just a friendly reminder this holiday season for those of you who complain about "politically correct prayer" or "the war on christmas." the united states of america (which was supposedly founded on religious freedom) interrupts its financial and education systems to make way for christian holy days. good friday (which has no biblical backing), easter sunday (which should always be held at the end of passover but almost never is), and christmas (which is definitely not held on the day of christ's birth)... are all days off of work and school for just about everyone. there is no war on christmas, christianity, or your christian god. teachers still give homework to jewish students over rosh hashanah and yom kippur. muslims are often not allowed to leave their workplace to pray salat at noon. heaven forbid we allow others to celebrate religious traditions that vary from our own.
my daughter's name
"evangeline, a tale of acadie" is a poem by the american poet henry wadsworth longfellow. it describes the betrothal of an acadian peasant girl (named evangeline) to her lover, gabriel (a british foreigner), and their separation during the great expulsion of the british from canada. the poem then follows evangeline across the landscapes of america as she spends years in a search for him. she later settles in philadelphia and, as an old woman, works as a nurse among the poor. while tending the dying during an epidemic she finds gabriel among the sick, and he dies in her arms.
despite the fact that longfellow had no links to the acadians or louisiana, the cajuns have adopted her story into their culture. though “evangeline” was not a usual acadian name before the poem was published, it is today relatively common among the descendants of the acadians. evangeline is also the name of a parish in louisiana.
later works of fiction expanded upon the material of the poem, claiming the “real names” of the characters had been “emmeline labiche” (in longfellow her full name is evangeline bellefontaine) and “louis arceneaux” (in the poem, gabriel lajeunesse). among sites which claim a relation to these pseudohistorical figures are a house north of lafayette, louisiana, which supposedly belonged to gabriel, and the grave of emmeline in the perpetual adoration garden & historic cemetery in st. martin de tours church square, on main street, st. martinville.
"the evangeline tree" is a tree in lousiana where evangeline supposedly hung herself in her grief. legend says that the reason the weaping willow weaps is in sorrow for evangeline's loss; the moss that grows on said trees is also said to be a physical representation of her spirit as she wanders the bayous looking for her lost lover. the moss is supposed to represent her hair tangled in the trees.
liberal arts degree
i saw this image recently that featured a man welding something and read, "i keep hearing about free college but never free trade school. i guess learning a useful skill isn't as important as a liberal arts degree."
this is insanely frustrating to me.
a "liberal arts degree" is neither simply a degree in art or an indoctrination of liberal ideas. this mindset suggests that getting a college-level education is worthless and does not provide a "useful skill." also, this is incorrect information. "tradeschool" is another name for "technical college." the fight for free college doesn't exclude technical college. plus, tradeschool is generally far less expensive. yes, we need plumbers, electricians, carpenters, welders, mechanics, etc., but we also need architects, writers, lawyers, doctors, teachers, etc. all of these professions are vital to a healthy and growing community.
if you're dating a single mother, but aren't ready to commit to a relationship, tell her so she can leave you. don't waste her time. don't lead her on for months thinking you are establishing a relationship. it's not fair to the child or her. that's how she became a single mother in the first place. if you want to have fun without commitment or any thought of the future, date a woman with no children who wants the same thing. there are plenty.
that single mother has dealt with enough pain. she deserves a strong man who can shoulder the storm with her. whose strengths will compliment her weaknesses. who can lead her child and be her rock. who can teach her child what a loving, healthy relationship is by how he treats her with respect and faithful commitment. who can melt away her insecurities. who can destroy her trust issues. who can break down her wall and show her what reciprocal love is. who respects her and all that she does. who wants to take care of her.
she's strong, she's wise, and she knows how to be affectionate and nurturing to a man, because she’s raising another human being. her entire life is putting another human being before herself. she is patient, loving, and independent. men have no idea how hard it can be for single mothers to be both parents. she wipes away her own tears, because women can cry rivers having to raise a child all by themselves. it's amazing and rewarding, but it's not easy.
so, please, when you meet a single mother, don't make her life harder by leading her on. if you aren't ready for commitment, say so. if you don't want children, say so. if you can't see yourself making her a priority in your life, say so. she deserves the truth. she deserves your respect. she deserves her fairytale. some man is out there who will give it to her, and if you're not walking with her, you're just standing in her way.
the phrase "healthy snack" means that the snack itself is in good health. it doesn't make sense. "healthFUL snack" is the correct phrase.
the phrase "i am nauseous" means you evoke feelings of disgust; when people see or smell you they want to puke. "i am nauseATED" is what you really mean.
when you say "i could care less" you are actually saying that you could still have less interest in the matter. "i couldN'T care less" is what you're trying to say.
if you willingly got drunk, and willingly had sex with someone, you consented. you were not raped. rape is having sex with someone against their will. if you say no and he/she does it anyway - you've been raped. if you are unconcious - you've been raped. if you have been drugged against your will - you've been raped. but, if you go to a bar or a party and engage in consensual sex, then you have not been raped. is a man/woman having sex with someone who is clearly too drunk to make wise decisions a bit doggish? absolutely, yes. is it rape? definitely, no. learn to take responsibility for your own bodily autonomy, and stop blaming other people for your mistakes.
"i hate country music."
no, you hate pop country. you don't know anything about real country music. of course you hate pop country. it's a bunch of pretty-boys singing about stuff they've never done. they've never lived in a trailer on the side of a river with a one eyed dog. they've never been beaten with their own pegleg cause they cheated on their wife. they've never drank nattie light on their back porch and shot squirrels for target practice. all they've done is buy an expensive hat, a pair of ostrich cowboy boots, and landed a major record deal using a fake accent.
country music encompasses several sub genres (classic, bluegrass, honky tonk, rockabilly, texas swing, zydeco) and shares characteristics with its sister genres (blues, folk, americana). true country music comes from the gut; from real life experience, and that's evident when it's authentic. it's not just the shit you hear on fm radio or watch on cmt.
i can't understand how anyone could have anything negative to say about Michelle Obama.
Michelle is one of THREE first ladies with a graduate degree... two actually. princeton (cum laude) AND harvard. she was Barack's superior when they met. she writes her own speeches, is an amazing mother, and has been unapologetically vocal about the realities of being black in america. she's possibly THE most dignified and refined woman to have ever stepped foot in the white house.
people can say what they want but it is hard to deny how she symbolizes greatness in nearly all that she does, from her exhilarating speeches to her uplifting and empowering work for girls and women. any woman who steps into the white house as first lady has an enormous role to fill. is there really any questioning the exemplary work Michelle Obama has done?
restaurant and venue managers: this is what you're saying when you ask a musician to play for free.
"hey, will you perform a valuable artistic skill that required you to diligently practice for many years to master? i know you have bills to pay just like everyone else, but i don't value your trade as an actual profession. i want my paying customers to be entertained. you don't mind do you?"
i am so tired of being called a "priviledged white girl" in a condescending way. the phrase drips with resentment and stinks of self righteousness.
yes, i am white. i have likely experienced the many benefits of being white in a primarily white culture. is my life easy? i wouldnt say it was insanely difficult, mostly because im not a crybaby. but do i own an iphone? no. i have a generic phone with an ultra cheap plan from metro pcs. do i own a fancy car? no. i own a 2005 toyota sienna that, while i am grateful takes me from point a to point b, is in a constant state of disrepair. i am a single mom and a student (who doesnt receive wic or government grants from a fafsa). i have about 5 shirts and 4 pairs of the same color tights. i have 2 pairs of shoes.
when i cant have an opinion on social issues because my consciousness is projected in a white body, there is a problem. when i am told that because i am white my opinions are irrelevant, there is a problem. when you tell white people they dont get to express thoughts on any topic because they're a certain color, you are telling them "youíre all assholes. you have never accomplished anything, everything has been handed to you. youíve been winning at life since you were born to your probably married white parents, you non-bastard. youíll skate through life with endless money and more luck than you deserve."
that mindset is so insanely invalidating and unfair to those who it doesn't apply too.
well, today has been a rotten day in which i have endured a plethera of bullshit from both an inadequate professor and an abrasive peer. it is also the last day i have custody of my son theo for the next 2 weeks. times like this remind me that while life is beautifully dimensional, it can also leave you blinded by the headlights of vaccuous crap. experience is a matchless teacher, and success is my preferred flavor of vengeance. here's to using fleeting moments of negativity as lessons in resilience, and also to having an extra cup of coffee.
refusing to vote is not a protest. no one will acknowledge that you didnt vote. there wont be a list of non voters who receive a pat on the back for stickin' it to the man. refusing to vote simply means you willingly relinquished your say in the outcome of your future. lame.
"the price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." -plato
when quoting the "greats", consider this:
mahatma gandhi (1869-1948)
let his wife die because he didn't want her to be treated with modern british medicines whereas he used the same treatment on himself when he fell ill shortly thereafter.
"the female is a female by virtue of a certain lack of qualities; we should regard the female nature as afflicted with a natural defectiveness."
friedrich niche (1844-1900)
"when a woman has scholarly inclinations there is usually something wrong with her sexual organs."
i am lucky to live in a world where coorporate media dictates what i digest, and who i am supposed to empathize with.
i will remain quiet about issues like global starvation, genocide, and sex trade. these issues do not deserve my attention or yours.
i will parade around social media vocalizing my support for issues that have never affected my life.
kim kardashian has more than 45 million more twitter followers than national geographic.
"it's now very common to hear people say, 'i'm rather offended by that.' as if that gives them certain rights. it's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'i find that offensive.' it has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'i am offended by that.' well, so fucking what."
political correctness is intolerance disguised as tolerance, attempting to control peoples language with strict rules. its not the way to fight descrimination. silencing people is not the best method in solving problems that go much deeper than speech. questioning the moral majority is important, especially when peoples opinions start to be bottled up, labelled, and spoon fed to good hearted people who think they are being progressive. blindly defending these movements without question is regress disguised as progress. movements become associated with key words or terms that their defenders can just shout as a safety net of "im right and youre wrong!", and if anyone questions these ideals, they are immediately painted in an evil or bigoted light and are often attacked as "racist", "sexist", or "homophobic". when it becomes taboo or offensive to simply question each anothers opinions, there is a serious problem. and keep in mind, stephen fry was a liberal jewish homosexual.
here's why "tone-policing" is a rubbish term used to justify poor communication skills.
how an argument or opinion is presented has everything to do with how the audience receives it. in the adult world, how an argument is framed in a civil conversation is of utmost importance. is the goal to ultimately change anything? if so, adjusting the approach would likely be beneficial. i agree that tone has nothing to do with the validity of an argument, but when screaming, yelling, and insulting come into play it is only human nature for it to fall on deaf ears. accusing the audience of "tone-policing" is conflating a desire to avoid a fight with an unwillingness to have a difficult conversation. i'm willing to have a difficult conversation, but what i'm not willing to do is communicate with an irrational person who is screaming and yelling rather than presenting valid, thoughtful arguments. if hostility is hindering how an argument is heard, then it is preventing successful communication and is counter-productive.
we live in a society full of bullshit tumblr politics where EVERYONE is in a perpetual state of victimhood, so in the grand spirit of offending everyone (which you all know is my absolute favorite thing to do) i will now create a platform from which you can QQ just a bit more, you oppressed fuck.
you can be a fat black queer atheist transwoman with a prosthetic leg and PTSD and that still doesnt:
-mean everything that comes from your mouth is gold
-mean you cant be toxic or just plain wrong as fuck
-mean everyone who has any sort of privilege over you has to listen to everything you say and obey it
-give you the right to basically be a self-righteous ornery asshole
road to failure
tip-toeing around other people's anger is only catering to the most idiotic aspect of their personality. when someone is offended, this doesnít make them right... it makes them offended. if you want to be a successful person, fretting over the emotional reaction of others will destroy you and make it difficult to achieve your goal. i'm not saying that being an asshole will make you successful... but if you are unwilling to occasionally disregard the emotional reaction of your peers, you are almost certainly on the road to failure.
the sun hadn't yet risen as i drug myself around this morning, only stopping to groan, "but why does it have to be my first day back at class that theodore wakes up at four am?"
"oh, honey. it's always when you have a gig or a luncheon or school the next day that your child needs you... and that's just motherhood." she cooed as she brought me a warm cup of hazelnut coffee.
in that moment i realized that today's struggles were merely a continuation of what she had already been doing for me for twenty-four years, and i was suddenly overwhelmed with a bitter combination of guilt and gratitude.
as i sit here on the couch with my hazelnut coffee and weep, it is not with the worn truth that i can never repay my mother, but with the remorseful admission that i had to become one to realize it.
gmos have reduced greenhouse gasses equivalent to removing 11.9 million cars from the road for a year by reducing fuel use. they use by far less pesticides and help small farmers by allowing them to produce more for less. higher yields, less pesticides = healthier people who are better nourished and also healthier soil. people in the developing world are among the first to reap benefits from this technology. they have a strong potential to prevent malnutrition and world hunger. look up "golden rice" and get mad that its not a thing yet.
the case of genetically modified food is overblown. most people dont even know why they are against gmos they have just been spoon fed hippie propoganda and dont stop to realize that food science is not our enemy.
don't get me wrong. i think monsanto is *relatively* evil. i am against irresponsible pesticide use and i am against large companies suing farmers. but when genetic engineering is used to decrease pesticide use, to add nutrients to crops in malnourished countries, and otherwise improve the quality of our food products, then it's clearly a valuable tool that can contribute to a safe and healthy food supply.
not to mention, the gmo scare is a distraction from far more important issues going on in the food industry:
- a factory farming system that's abusive to the animals we raise and results in unnatural, highly processed meats
- an obesity epidemic resulting from subsidized corn crops and unchecked fast food marketing
- an excess of "natural and artificial" flavorings, sweeteners, and colors adding labels like "usda organic!" and "gmo free!" are mostly just ways for *green* companies to masturbate the mass cultural delusion that these claims make their products safer and healthier, when in reality they just make them more expensive.
additionally, many people dont realize that the vast majority of pesticidal substances that we consume are in our diets naturally and are present in organic foods as well as non-organic ones. 99.99 percent (by weight) of the pesticides in the american diet are chemicals that plants produce to defend themselves. so... the vast majority of pesticidal substances that we consume are in our diets naturally and are present in organic foods as well as non-organic ones.
think youre saving the world or your family's health by only eating *organic* produce? think again! you are likely being ripped off. the usda revealed in 2012 that 43% of the 571 samples of ďorganicĒ produce that were tested contained prohibited pesticide residues. the presence of gmos or prohibited synthetic pesticides in any amount does not affect the organic status of the farmerís products or farm. some consumers think that the usda national organic program requires certified organic products to be free of ingredients from gmos... wrong. so enjoy your 4 dollar "organic" tomatoes! youve just been punk'd.
my birthday is sep 10, which makes my "star sign" virgo. while i admit that the description of a virgo is pretty dead on... id like to also point out that the pseudoscience behind horoscope signs is vauge and ambiguous... much like a fortune cookie or hallmark card, making the descriptions easy to relate too- as they apply to generally everyone. i think people want to believe in a personalized idol because it gives them a false sense of divine, relatable significance that not only describes themselves but also connects them with others.
stop "praying" for haiti and donate money to *legitimate* charities if you actually want to make a difference. dont encourage others to pray. it does nothing. dont justify doing nothing through prayer. youre not helping. if you want to do nothing, do nothing- lots of people do nothing when shit happens (its human nature) but dont lie to yourself or others that you have magic mind powers by just "praying" or "sending positive vibes". you are literally doing nothing. nothing at all.
heres how you can actually help.