some good designs for gender neutral public restrooms 

I really do appreciate that the last gender neutral bathroom pictured provides some reading material

'the majority this websites userbase are losers who get no bitches, unlike me, who is cool and disaffected and fucks like a champ' you are literally a tumblr user

Also while we’re here I want everyone to appreciate that This

This wild, wonderful, beautifully animated and heartfelt queer story started here

Here, on tumblr, by an art student who’s wrestling with his identity, mental health, and religious trauma

Tell your stories, kids, you never know how many people will thank you for it

As a bisexual person I'm keenly aware of how such stereotypes are inevitably harmful to us, but unfortunately when I see bisexuals in fiction who are Evil and stylish and fuck like champions I can't help but go "oh work" for a sec. It's a difficult conundrum

i swear to god if one more stupid fandom ruins a beautiful text post i am calling the police

I am obligated to reblog this again, because it is now Superwholock, and therefore perfection.

people need to remember that every tumblr post in 2012 was like this

A 2017 classic updated for the new game.

yesterday in the middle of a lightning storm i had link take a wooden cart with a fan attached over some railings in the sky, and i went to hit the fan to turn it off and instead accidentally demolished the wood and immediately fell to my death

bless this game

oh yeah have i ever told yall of the academic war i have been an unwilling soilder in for the past two years

okay SO. i have two professors that both teach this one subject, but different classes. they have different last names, so i didnt know this at first and espically since they are academic RIVELS at my school, but they are MARRIED. but for the past 8 years they have been in an academic WAR of geospatical sciences data. more accurately, the raster vs vector data debate. i am personally on the side of "both have their pros and cons and can be utalizied to the utmost efficency" but both professors are like, DEADLOCKED in insistanting one is better then the other

so, professor A is my mentor. i like him a lot, and he was the main person that taught me the most abotu Eris and ArcGIS. professor B is a professor i had one for class, and shes nice and knows a lot of little tricks about Eris programming but mostly relies on arcMAP because shes the raster data professor.

and THESE MOTHERFUCKERS. have written no less then 30 papers that is basically like a "re: re: re: re: re: re: vector data is better then raster fuck you" but like, Professionally. and they leave stupid notes in the footnotes that read "Reguardless of Professor A's opinions reguarding the efficency of Vector data, Raster data has a more efficant polygon computing rate and is the most commonly used program on interplantaring mapping" and its HILARIOUS

ive read all of their papers, and its basically like reading an email chain between a married couple arguing over the colors of the kitchen backsplash for their new home. its HILARIOUS. but obviously, because of their differnet last names and because they act like they HATE each other, NOT VERY MANY PEOPLE REALIZES THEYRE MARRIED

until like LAST WEEK

professor B publishes a paper that casually drops the word "husband"

and obviously all the students are like "oh i didnt know u were married!" because we read that shit like how white suburban mothers read People Magazine

and shes like "yeah, its Professor A"

and we all FLIPPED. THE FUCK. OUT

we thought the framed picture of the two of them on professor A's desk was ironic because hes that type of guy

like, you gotta undestand. these two have gotten into YELLING matches in hallways. these two refuse to go onto trips with each other. but apparently they have a system where they quite LITERALLY leave all of their work at work and drive home in seperate cars and literally NEVER mention work at home. it is SO funny

punks of color bc this website is slacking

Today's court ruling weakening discrimination protections for LGBTQ people stands out as extraordinarily strange to me for the simple fact that there was no case. The web designer in question never received a request to create a website for a gay wedding, but instead argued that a hypothetical situation in which she did would violate her rights. I've never really heard of anything like this before— how does she even have standing to sue? Can @radiofreederry or someone with more knowledge of legalese than me elaborate on this?

Melissa Gira Grant, "The Christian Right Is Making Up Wedding Websites to Attack LGBTQ People," The New Republic, 28 June 2023:

In this latest case, there is no website and no wedding—just an argument from an anti-LGBTQ group in search of the court’s favor...

No person has hired Smith to create a wedding website. In fact, Smith has never designed a wedding website, according to her petition to the court. As such, there is no client Smith has told she is rejecting due to her stated religious beliefs that marriage is only allowed between one man and one woman. In the absence of all that, ADF has, instead, fashioned Smith as the victim of an injury that has never occurred.  

So who has hypothetically victimized Smith? A Colorado anti-discrimination law, which, since 2008, has included protections from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. ADF claims Smith’s desire “to bring glory to God by creating unique expression that shares her religious beliefs of creating wedding websites” is thwarted by this law “because she only wants to make websites that comport with her values that same-sex marriage is illegitimate.” Were Smith to get into the wedding website business, the anti-discrimination law “would force me to say things about marriage I disagree with,” Smith wrote in an opinion piece for The Washington Times, when her case was argued at the Supreme Court last December...

Can the court rule on thought experiments?

I've been going insane about this because it seems to me that there would literally be no standing in this case. I think I need to dig deeper into this because I feel like this should have been thrown out several courts down for simple failure to state a claim on which relief may be sought, and surely the defense should have been able to figure that out no later than the discovery phase of the initial action.

It looks like the ADF is arguing that the case counts as a "Pre-enforcement challenge," because Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus (2014) found that "An allegation of future injury may suffice if the threatened injury is 'certainly impending,' or there is a 'substantial risk' that the harm will occur." So she would likely have standing to sue if there were "substantial risk" she'd be put into her hypothetical situation. But how can she be at "substantial risk" of having someone ask her to make a gay wedding website when she's never made a wedding website before? This whole thing stretches credulity