Tag: text

missmentelle:

Health insurance is a mental health issue. I can’t help a client who can’t afford to see me. 

Housing is a mental health issue. I can’t use therapy to help a client whose depression and anxiety come directly from sleeping in the streets. 

Food insecurity is a mental health issue. I can’t help a client who isn’t taking their medication because their pills say “take with food” and they have nothing to eat.

Healthcare is a mental health issue. I can’t help a client whose “depression” is actually a thyroid condition they can’t afford to get treated. 

Wages are a mental health issue. I can’t help a client whose anxiety comes from the fact that they are one missed shift away from not being able to make rent.

Child care is a mental health issue. I can’t help a client who works 80 hours per week to afford daycare, and doesn’t have the time or energy left to come see me. 

Drug policing is a mental health issue. I can’t help a client who ended up in prison because they got caught self-medicating with illegal substances. 

Police brutality is a mental health issue. I can’t help a client whose ‘anxiety’ is a very real and justified fear of ending up as a hashtag. 

If you’re going to make a stand for improving mental health, you have to understand that addressing mental health goes way beyond hiring more therapists and talking about mental health on social media. If we’re really serious about tackling this mental health problem as a country, it means rolling up our sleeves and taking down the barriers that prevent people from getting the help they need – even if those people are different than us, lead different lives, and make choices we don’t agree with. 

We aren’t “fixing” mental health unless we’re fixing it for everybody. 

Ferengi – just for the irony of that language being completely useless and unprofitable irl!

linguisten:

languagesandshootingstars:

❝To say there is no worth in learning a language that isn’t economically useful is like saying there’s no point in being friends with somebody unless they’re going to help you get a better job. It’s a spectacular, cynical miss of the point.❞
— Rhona NicDhùghaill

Langblr ask game: send me an ask telling me what language I should learn and why!

True. But there are all the anons suggesting to you languages with tens or hundreds of millions of speakers, saying those languages are particularly useful. That characterization does not make any sense if there is no presupposed gradation of usefulness, i.e. if there is no contrast “more useful”: “less useful” or “useful” : “useless”.  

Thus, when we want to oppose the notion of “useless” languages, we need to stop praising other languages as “useful”. 

@linguisten did u not get that this was a star trek joke ?

whosplayerthree:

clitcheese:

here’s a bunch of weirdly in depth d&d questions i have that’s going to take me years of experience to answer so it’d be helpful if someone knows any of this already: so when gygax says, pretty much constantly, that keeping track of in universe time is essential to dungeon crawl campaigns,

1) does this still hold up as true? is there really no way to wing it that DMs have found in the last 30 years?

2) does it still hold up if you abandon wandering monsters for a dungeon with only keyed encounters?

3) what’s the easiest way to count time at the table? should i get an abacus or an app or something like that to calculate time spent?

I have never been in a dnd group where time meant a dang thing when it came to the dungeon crawling parts. I’m sure it could be relevant in some games and used somehow, but it being essential isn’t true any more j guess. Now, OUTSIDE of dungeon crawling I’ve seen it be relevant and used in some interesting ways once in awhile, but even then, still not totally relevant. Only time it’s consistently relevant is when spells that last for a certain amount of time are used, and if it’s not during a match, during which time is easier to track because TECHNICALLY every round is 6 seconds long in in-game time (though rarely seems plausible lol), dms usually just spitball the time that’s passed and let players know when"yeah I think [amount time specified in rulebook that the spell lasts] has passed" or not. Or at least from all my various experiences, including my own short time dming. Didn’t see anything in the rule book about how to track time out of battle and if it’s necessary or not in 5e, and don’t even remember anything about it from when I used to play 3.5e.

yeah that’s the thing i’m interested in DMing 5th but also i’ve read a lot about the Basic editions from the 80s and they sound fun and i’ve been reading bits and pieces from all over the game’s history, mostly because a lot of things in 5e make a lot more sense if u know more about the history. and i’m specifically thinking of this bit in the 1st edition DMG that’s Gygax being like, he will personally come to your house and eat your dice if you don’t track what your characters are doing for every minute they’re inside a dungeon.

the old versions have this thing where turns and rounds are different depending what you’re doing. so it was everything happens in 10 second rounds in combat, but outside that there’s 10 minute exploration rounds. the idea being that your character takes about 10 minutes to scour every 10×10 square in an average sized room and spend the right amount of time finding secret doors and traps and hidden stuff and making their map. and 10 minutes every hour is spent taking a break, and every few hours you get a random encounter to tell your characters to search the dungeon quicker. and 5e has this only as a table saying how fast you can travel and still find hidden things, but it doesn’t have anything on dividing up time outside of combat. but the earlier versions make it really clear that if you don’t track every 10 minute chunk of exploration, you’re doing the game wrong. like, As Wrong As You Can Possibly Be, and u should fuck off to play a different game

and I know 5e must work perfectly well without tracking time like this, otherwise it would be in the rulebooks. I was just thinking specifically because old versions had a very different default play style, where there were megadungeons that took up whole decade long campaigns, or it was one dungeon and then wilderness travel and then the next dungeon, and having a storyline was something that came secondary to Hauling Treasure. i think if it’s a game like that, if i play through a megadungeon in 5e that’s like 50 levels deep and that’s most of the campaign, then i’m pretty sure i’d need to start counting time again. to keep track of hours for wandering monsters and when to force rests on them, because the game then becomes really focused on attrition and resources like light and food, and it’s like “every minute that we don’t get healed up again or find a safe space to rest we’re probably going to die”.

which sounds fun, i’m just a bit in the dark about all the specifics, and i’m also not even sure how well 5e as a system copes with something like that, and how i can simplify something as math-heavy as this to fit my DM style and not be dead weight at the table.

jakemorph:

magsbanes:

can tongues in fanfiction stop fighting each other for dominance, let them come home from war

it’s really fucked up because the guy who did that study found out that tongues only do that in captivity and that wild tongues are actually much more sociable with each other

here’s a bunch of weirdly in depth d&d questions i have that’s going to take me years of experience to answer so it’d be helpful if someone knows any of this already: so when gygax says, pretty much constantly, that keeping track of in universe time is essential to dungeon crawl campaigns,

1) does this still hold up as true? is there really no way to wing it that DMs have found in the last 30 years?

2) does it still hold up if you abandon wandering monsters for a dungeon with only keyed encounters?

3) what’s the easiest way to count time at the table? should i get an abacus or an app or something like that to calculate time spent?

folly-of-alexandria:

You know, it’s constantly bothersome how the primary source of prejudice in Transmisogyny is the inability of the vast majority of cis people to see trans-women as anything other than purely sexual objects.

For the most trans-women, the mere act of existing in a space is considered as a sexual action by the majority of cis people around them. A trans woman (especially if she’s not-white) doing something as mundane as walking down the street or checking into a hotel room can be detained by police under suspicion of prostitution (having any condoms on her person will even be used as evidence against her). There’s the narrative that trans women shouldn’t be allowed in public restrooms because people think that they would only do so to sexually assault or harass cis women or children.

There’s the idea that the entire purpose behind transitioning was to trick innocent cis people into having sex with someone that’s secretly a man. Mind you, almost no trans woman would do this for the simple fact that it’s a quick way to get murdered; and this narrative is also played up in the defense of cis-people that do murder trans women in the “Trans-Panic” defense which is completely legal in 48/50 states in the US.

Then there are those that attribute value on trans women based on how fuckable they perceive us to be. Some people see trans women as freaky beings that straddle the line of the defined binary in appearance and due to their personal lack of attraction to us see us as not worth treating as human. Or those whom believe that their finding us fuckable is the goal and that simply saying “Hey, I’d totally have sex with you.” is what we want every cis person to say. But these people still operate view us as purely sexual individuals without and other facets of worth to our lives.

And then there are those that see our transitions as a sort of extreme masturbatory fetish. As if the entire goal of it was some sexual self-gratification. That the whole thing was to take our bodies and change and dress them in a way to get ourselves off with an autogynophilic pleasure.

A couple days ago I came across a post that was a screenshot of a post made by a man. The post was a man comparing a picture of a trans woman that fell in to conventional standards of beauty, to a picture of a TERF whom deviated greatly from those same standards. The man then wrote a caption saying “No wonder TERFs hate trans women.” The implication that trans women are fuckable (and therefore good) while TERFs are not (and therefore bad). A separate TERF had then taken this as a whole and left a comment claiming that the man’s comments of finding trans women fuckable (and therefore good), was proof that trans women were accepted by the systems of the patriarchy and therefore not only not oppressed but an example of trans women’s supposed true goal of being thought of as fuckable whether by men, women, or both. Now they’re both completely off-base because again some random dude telling me he’d like to fuck me is no comfort (and actually rather creepy) and it’s no indication of viewing me as a person, and the TERFs wrong because her statement is almost the same as saying a woman who gets catcalled is less oppressed than a woman a man decides isn’t pretty enough to catcall.

The thing that all of those kind of cis people above don’t understand, is that being a trans woman has nothing to do with any of that, at all. All of those assumptions hinge on the exclusion of the concept that trans women have any personal identity outside of our sexuality. The fact of the matter is that our goals as trans women begin and end with 1)Being comfortable in our own skin. 2)Being able to do so while being treated as human. 3)Living a happy, multi-faceted life. The listed cis people don’t comprehend that simple fact, and until society at large does, transmisogyny will continue to widely persist.