She deserves her own post. ily @frootbatzz <3
Miguel and Lego Spiderman’s dynamic in a nutshell:
A tiktok that I thought y’all would enjoy 😂 (if only this happened in the movie)
I finally switched to firefox and I've seen a lot of posts about the effortless importing of preferences from chrome and how it's important to support non-chromium platforms, but nobody is talking about the loss of productivity that happens when beautiful women come to your house to kiss you on the mouth because they heard you use firefox now. nobody's talking about this
i love it when italians argue about italian. like we don’t even know how our language really works we just roll with it
Italian is 107 different provincial languages stuck together with spit and half a prayer
My bf lives in another region and we are constantly arguing about regional variations of words and we both live in the fucking north of Italy
one time i saw a map of italy but instead of cities and roads etc it was just covered w different ways you can say the word vagina. it was covered
oh I can think of at least seven ways to say the word vagina right off the top of my head rn. I can’t imagine what I could do if I tried harder
Fjgkahfmangksoajufnajejgnanfjakirjvjjs
this is the Italian Vagina Map, reblog to… I’m not sure actually. Can’t hurt though.
reblog to Italian season your pussy
biologists will be like this is a very simplified diagram of a mammalian cell
chemists will be like this is a molecule
okay but this is what the best render of a human cell looks like
They are not kidding
We are full of so many fuckign guys
YES I'M GAY:
faGgot
dykAe (the a is silent)
trannY
i may be stupid
you shut your whore mouth
i won’t hesitate bitch
ALT
The most ridiculous thing about this shit is that the idea that skeletal remains can be easily and unambiguously 'sexed' is absolutely bunkus
In 1972, Kenneth Weiss, now a professor emeritus of anthropology and genetics at Pennsylvania State University, noticed that there were about 12 percent more male skeletons than females reported at archaeological sites. This seemed odd, since the proportion of men to women should have been about half and half. The reason for the bias, Weiss concluded, was an “irresistible temptation in many cases to call doubtful specimens male.” For example, a particularly tall, narrow-hipped woman might be mistakenly cataloged as a man. After Weiss published about this male bias, research practices began to change. In 1993, 21 years later, the aptly named Karen Bone, then a master’s student at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, examined a more recent dataset and found that the bias had declined: The ratio of male to female skeletons had balanced out. In part that might be because of better, more accurate ways of sexing skeletons. But also, when I went back through the papers Bone cited, I noticed there were more individuals categorized as “indeterminate” after 1972 and basically none prior.
Allowing skeletons to remain unsexed, or “indeterminate,” reflects an acceptance of the variability and overlap between the sexes. It does not necessarily mean that the skeletons classified this way are, in fact, neither male nor female, but it does mean that there is no clear or easy way to tell the difference. As science and social change in the 1970s and 1980s revealed that sex is complicated, the category of “indeterminate sex” individuals in skeletal research became more common and improved scientific accuracy.
Source: https://www.sapiens.org/biology/intersex-biological-sex/
Cis transphobes, you too could have your skeleton miscategorised hundreds of years after your death, because neither gender nor sex are the clear binaries you want them to be. Which you would know if your view of science in these fields wasn't perpetually stuck in the first half of the 20th century.
(another good article from Sapiens on transgender perspectives on archaeology/anthropology - https://www.sapiens.org/archaeology/transgender-people-exist-in-history/ )
Anyway I just wanted to put this here to say that the assholes who go "when they find your bones" aren't even correct, in recent decades that narrow approach has been challenged in the fields of archaeology and anthropology, and don't let anyone invalidate the joy we feel in life.
Trans joy now and forever.
Yes!!!!
A) not all archaeologists are osteoarchaeologists
B) the ones that are, are aware of ambiguity in human bones!! Which exists! This is like osteo-archaeology 101 (literally my intro bones & stones class covered this. It was "likely," this or that, not guaranteed).
C) all of them can conceive of human remains in context of how they were found meaning that a good archaeologist doesn't just look at a pelvis and declare the sex of the skeleton and that's all they ever study or do. ....that would be silly and also pointless. Archaeologists are gonna look at lots of things. They're going to look at epitaphs/tombstones, burial objects, clothing, location of burial, etc etc.
Like if an archaeologist digs up a person whose tombstone says "loving daughter, friend, sister, she will be missed," and that person's pelvis isn't as wide as expected they're going to get laughed at if they declare that the skeleton is actually a man on the basis of ignoring literally all other data points and the fact that outliers exist all the time.
An archaeologist might be able to gather enough data to argue: "this person could have been/was likely a trans woman, and here's what we know about their life, and they existed back then, and here's how they were honored in death." But it won't be done by bone size alone, and also... just shows trans people exist and are real and have history.
terfs just hate admitting science might validate trans existence as legitimate and real. But science doesn't work by running around making claims and then forcing evidence to fit those claims.