I think now that we’re in 2017 we can stop villainizing the witch from Hänsel and Gretel. Some kids ate her house. She gets to eat them. It was a fair deal.
counterpoint: Hänsel and Gretel were led out into the woods to starve at the urging of their mother, so both parents don’t have to ration any more food for them during hard times. Hänsel and Gretel were underfed and desperate, and when life gives you a gingerbread house in that state, you eat the windowsill and the front stoop and every gumdrop you can find.
conclusion: if the witch prompted the children to explain themselves she’d realize it was ultimately parents’ neglect that led them to this point.
solution: eat the parents. everyone wins!
Not the solution I was expecting, but honestly, yeah, it makes sense.
….good point
Thesis: the narrow focus on public performance over substantive action in certain activist circles has less to do with cynical schemes to game the system for progressive brownie points, and more to do with the fact that many folks basically think social activism is a form of ritual magic. Popular histories give us images of Great Men making speeches and leading marches and circulating petitions, and completely erase all the ground-level infrastructure that made all that stuff work; the end result is that a lot of folks seem honestly to believe that bringing about social change is a matter of performing the appropriate symbolic actions and waiting for reality to reconfigure itself accordingly.
Triggers are like allergies.
- An allergy is an extreme sensitivity to something that might not bother most people.
- There are common ones and rare ones
- They range from mildly annoying to life threatening, depending on the degree of sensitivity.
- Not everyone has them. Some people might have several.
- There’s no need to include allergy warnings when your audience is small and well known and you know no one present is allergic to anything you’re bringing.
- When your audience is wider or unknown, it’s courteous to include warnings for the more common ones (peanuts, milk). Because better safe than sorry.
- If you find out that someone with a rarer one might be present, you should include warnings for things you usually wouldn’t (cayenne pepper, mint).
- If you set off an allergic reaction, you apologize even if you didn’t know they had that allergy, you do what you can to help, and you take care not to do it again.
- Teasing someone for having one is stupid.
- People don’t choose to have them, and those that have them wish they didn’t.
- Faking one that you don’t have is bad form.
- And if you intentionally expose an allergic person to something you know they are allergic to, you are an ASSHOLE.
I have more.
- Sensitivity to an allergen can increase over time. Having better tolerance in the past does not mean that the current level of sensitivity is fake.
- Sensitivity to an allergen can decrease over time. Having better tolerance now does not mean that the past level of sensitivity was fake.
- An allergy can develop abruptly. Something that had no reaction on first exposure can have a violent reaction on second exposure.
- Often a person doesn’t know they have an allergy until their first allergic reaction. This can be terrifying.
Unfortunately some people treat allergies as nonsense too.
obi wan: dress as refugees
padmé: shows up in a solid gold, intricately carved headdress inlaid with precious metals, expensive ass hand embroidered bright yellow valentino haute couture specially tailored floor length gown with delicate purple stitching, glittering with hundreds of expensive jewels, gorgeous man candy adorning her perfectly slender, pale, queenly hands
padmé: perfect
[via ]
1 2