Where's The Beef?

cassandracaindesiresstuff asked: "Where do you always find the LoK eps early?"

Amazon

posted 5 hours ago
spektrmodule:

ultrafunnypictures:

222 Golden Retrievers Gather in Scotland

their purpose is unknown and likely sinister

spektrmodule:

ultrafunnypictures:

222 Golden Retrievers Gather in Scotland

their purpose is unknown and likely sinister

via sakuraocean · originally by ultrafunnypictures
via bobbityhobbity · originally by missgullibleforever
Anonymous asked: "ACCORDING TO DARWIN, WHITE PEOPLE ARE MORE EVOLVED THAN BLACK PEOPLE. DARWIN WAS RACIST."

factsinallcaps:

YOU’RE PARTIALLY RIGHT AND PARTIALLY WRONG. MOSTLY WRONG, BUT STILL ENOUGH RIGHT THAT I’M NOT GOING TO BEGRUDGE YOU THAT. LET’S SAY 65-35.

DARWIN HIMSELF PROBABLY WAS TAINTED BY THE RACIAL PREJUDICES OF HIS TIME AND POSITION OF SOCIETY. HE WAS, AFTER ALL, A WEALTHY WHITE ENGLISH MAN WHO LIVED EXCLUSIVELY IN THE 19TH CENTURY, NOTORIOUS FOR BEING ONE OF THE MOST RACIST CENTURIES. THE ONLY WHITE MAN FROM THIS TIME PERIOD I’M WILLING TO SAY WAS NOT RACIST AT ALL IS JOHN BROWN, BUT THIS ISN’T ABOUT HIM. 

THAT BEING SAID, DARWIN WAS PROBABLY RACIST BY MODERN STANDARDS. BY THE STANDARDS OF HIS TIME, HOWEVER, HE WAS PRACTICALLY A RADICAL ANTI-RACIST, ESPECIALLY DISGUSTED WITH THE HORRORS OF SLAVERY AND EUGENICS. 

PART OF THE COMMON CONFUSION COMES FROM THE FACT THAT HE OFTEN USED THE WORD “RACE” INTERCHANGEABLY WITH “VARIETY” OR “TYPE.” LIKE, HE USED THE WORD “RACE” TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN TYPES OF CABBAGE. 

THE OTHER TWO “DARWIN WAS RACIST” SUPPORTS COME FROM TWO DELIBERATE CAMPAIGNS TO MISREPRESENT HIS WRITINGS IN A WAY THAT WOULD, FRANKLY, DISGUST HIM.

THE FIRST IS A CAMPAIGN BY SUPPORTERS OF “SCIENTIFIC” RACISM, EUGENICS, AND SPECIFICALLY EUGENIC GENOCIDE, WHO CONVENIENTLY SKIM OVER THE FACT THAT DARWIN WAS ALMOST CONSTANTLY REMINDING HIS READERS THAT HUMANS, AS A SENTIENT SPECIES, ARE THANKFULLY CAPABLE OF SYMPATHY AND COMPASSION AND HAVE MOVED BEYOND THE BRUTAL REALITIES OF THE ANIMAL WORLD, WHERE THE SO-CALLED “INFERIOR” ARE LEFT TO DIE. THE TRUTH IS, DARWINIST LITERATURE ONLY MAKES SENSE AS RACIST LITERATURE IF YOU WERE ALREADY A RACIST AND A SUPPORTER OF EUGENIC GENOCIDE BEFORE YOU STARTED READING IT.  

THE SECOND IS A VERY POPULAR CREATIONIST CAMPAIGN, VERY OFTEN WITH BEN STEIN LEADING THE CHARGE, THAT SEEKS TO PORTRAY CHARLES DARWIN AS A EUGENICIST AND RACIST IN ORDER TO DISCREDIT THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION AS WHITE SUPREMACIST PROPAGANDA. IN FACT, WHILE I WAS RESEARCHING MY RESPONSE TO THIS, I HAD TO SIFT THROUGH A GREAT DEAL OF CREATIONIST WEBSITES MAKING THIS EXACT CLAIM, WHO USE DARWIN’S SUPPOSED WHITE SUPREMACY AS AN ARGUMENT AGAINST EVOLUTION. 

NOW, ONTO DARWIN’S ACTUAL VIEWS ON RACE. IF YOU, LIVING IN THE YEAR 2014, MET CHARLES DARWIN AT ANY POINT IN HIS LIFE AND TALKED TO HIM ABOUT RACE, HE WOULD PROBABLY SEEM LIKE A RACIST. WHILE HE WAS A SUPPORTER OF A UNIFIED HUMAN SPECIES (A RADICAL IDEA AT THE TIME, WHEN THE PREVAILING SCIENTIFIC NOTION WAS THAT THE HUMAN RACES WERE DIFFERENT SPECIES) WITH NO INHERENT BIOLOGICAL DISTINCTIONS (WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SUPERFICIAL TRAITS), HE WAS STILL A CULTURAL RACIST, THAT IS, BELIEVING THAT THERE WERE “CIVILIZED” AND “SAVAGE” CULTURES. 

HE ALSO FEARED THAT THE “SAVAGE” CULTURES WERE AT RISK OF EXTERMINATION OR SUBJUGATION. HOWEVER, THIS WAS NOT, AS DARWIN-WAS-RACIST ADVOCATES WOULD HAVE YOU BELIEVE, BASED ON THE BELIEF THAT THESE PEOPLE WERE AT AN EVOLUTIONARY DISADVANTAGE. HE FEARED THAT THEY WOULD BE EXTERMINATED OR SUBJUGATED BY ENGLISH COLONIALISM, WHICH WAS A VALID COMPLAINT, BECAUSE EXTERMINATION AND SUBJUGATION IS KIND OF COLONIALISM’S JAWN.

THIS WAS ALSO A RADICAL NOTION, BECAUSE THE PREVAILING SOCIOLOGICAL VIEWS AT THE TIME WERE “WE’RE OPPRESSING THEM FOR THEIR OWN GOOD, AND THE GOOD OF THE WORLD” AND “FUCK YOU, WE’RE ENGLAND AND WE DO WHAT WE WANT TO WHO WE WANT. HAHA OUR EMPIRE IS NEVER GOING TO FALL YOU GUYS.”

NOW, AS MENTIONED BEFORE, DARWIN TENDED TO REMIND HIS READERS THROUGHOUT HIS WORKS THAT HE WAS ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE NATURAL WORLD, AND THAT HUMAN EVOLUTION IS NO LONGER GUIDED SOLELY BY NATURAL SELECTION. SELF-AWARE SPECIES, LIKE HUMANS, HAVE OTHER CRITERIA FOR MATING BESIDES “STILL ALIVE” AND “BIOLOGICALLY VIABLE.” THIS IS CALLED ARTIFICIAL SELECTION, AND IT’S KIND OF TAKEN THE STEERING WHEEL WHEN IT COMES TO HUMAN EVOLUTION. 

MOST OF THE TIME, CREATIONIST LITERATURE TENDS TO SKIP THESE PASSAGES SO IT LOOKS LIKE DARWIN IS SAYING PRIVILEGED PEOPLE ARE JUST MORE FIT TO SURVIVE AND EVERYONE OPPRESSED IS ONLY OPPRESSED BECAUSE OF NATURAL INFERIORITY, AND SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DIE FOR THE GREATER GOOD. 

OF COURSE, THIS IS TOTAL BUNK, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE CREATIONIST CAMPAIGN AGAINST DARWIN WANTS YOU TO THINK WHEN YOU READ THEIR HEAVILY-EDITED VERSIONS OF HIS WRITING. 

THE TRUTH, THOUGH, IS THAT DARWIN’S ATTITUDE TOWARDS HUMAN INTELLIGENCE WAS ESSENTIALLY “WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY.” WHILE SOME ANIMALS MIGHT LEAVE THE SUFFERING TO THEIR LOT, HUMANS ARE CAPABLE OF COMPASSION, AND SHOULD SAVE OTHER HUMANS WHEN THEY’RE STRUGGLING OR IN DANGER. 

DARWIN WAS ALSO RAISED BY ABOLITIONISTS AND CONTINUED THE TRADITION INTO ADULTHOOD, VOCAL IN THE BELIEF THAT THE PRACTICE OF HOLDING HUMANS AS PROPERTY WAS NOT ONLY UNETHICAL, BUT ABHORRENT. 

THAT BEING SAID, THE SCIENTIFIC THEORY BEHIND EVOLUTION IS SOUND. EVEN IF DARWIN WAS AS RACIST AS BOTH EUGENICISTS AND CREATIONISTS TRY TO MAKE YOU BELIEVE, THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION IS STILL LEGIT. THANKFULLY, HE WAS ONLY LIKE 7% AS RACIST AS THOSE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE YOU BELIEVE, BUT YOU NEED TO BE CAREFUL WHEN DISCUSSING THIS ISSUE THAT YOU AREN’T CITING INDEPENDENTLY EUGENICIST LITERATURE, OR CREATIONIST LITERATURE, WHICH ARE DESIGNED TO INTENTIONALLY MISREPRESENT DARWIN’S THEORIES TO PUSH THEIR OWN BACKWARDS AGENDA.

WHAT I REALLY WANT YOU TO TAKE AWAY FROM THIS IS THAT “DARWIN WAS RACIST” IS A HALF-TRUTH AT BEST. IN 150 YEARS’ TIME, THE MOST PROGRESSIVE RACIAL VIEWS OF TODAY WILL BE 150 YEARS BEHIND THE TIMES. 150 YEARS FROM NOW, IF OUR MODERN CONCEPTIONS OF RACE AREN’T CONSIDERED RACIST, I WILL BE FURIOUS, BECAUSE IT MEANS WE WILL HAVE MADE NO PROGRESS.

ADDITIONALLY, THE FACT THAT THE VIEWS OF THE 19TH CENTURY ARE APPROXIMATELY 200 YEARS BEHIND THE VIEWS OF THE 21ST CENTURY IS A FACT THAT’S BEEN CO-OPTED AND EXPLOITED BY PEOPLE WHO WOULD GO TO ANY LENGTHS TO PRESERVE THOSE BACKWARDS VIEWS AND FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL AGAINST PROGRESS, BOTH SOCIAL AND SCIENTIFIC. 

best-of-memes:

Optional boss fight

best-of-memes:

Optional boss fight

via meggannn · originally by best-of-memes

I got my bending back!

via sherbies · originally by crossroads-of-destiny

shibbbyyy:

People have a knack of really oversimplifying feminism like “feminism: the radical notion that women are people” or “feminism is literally just believing in equality” like…no it’s not it’s so much more complex than that ask any dingus if they think women and men should be equal they’ll probably say yeah but their actions and thoughts probably majorly contradict that so quit acting like anyone’s a feminist if they vaguely believe women are ok humans

via cradlerobin · originally by shibbbyyy
lordllamacorn:

Library Elizabeth doodles

lordllamacorn:

Library Elizabeth doodles

via meggannn · originally by lordllamacorn

chrom-o-ween:

My favorite story is that one time Tolkien was with some writer friends and he was like “oh I’ve got a new story to show you guys” and one of them was like “as long as it’s not more fucking elves”

and it was

it was more fucking elves

via beachgnome · originally by chrom-o-ween

tastefullyoffensive:

[via imgur]

What’s the most dad thing your dad has ever done?

via potatofarmgirl · originally by tastefullyoffensive