dear david karp,

notentirely:

…

i understand this is your project and i’ll understand if you sell it. but i wanted to point out, you left money on the table when it came to me.

i’d have paid a small fee to have a “no-ads” dashboard. you could have added all the ads you wanted ($$) and i’d have given you money ($$) to have them not show up for me. money in your pocket both ways.

…

there are several other ways you missed making some solid dough on a tumblr fan such as myself, but i think the point is made.

you left money on the table with me. i hope you don’t do that with yahoo, or whomever you may sell to.

Sigh. It’s ridiculous how much I dislike the sentiments expressed in this thing and I am not really inclined at the moment to put my feelings into words. Sighsighsigh.

66 notes 

Pet Peeve #1358

When somebody knocks on my fully closed door - and opens it at virtually the same time. Why did you even bother knocking then.

2 notes 

svartskalleroy:

The notion that women who undergo plastic surgery for aesthetical reasons are not real is both sickening and reflective of our society’s misogynistic structure. 

Yes, way more women than men get cosmetic surgery, but I don’t think the mindset is limited to just women. Does that still make it inherently sexist? I don’t know. I do agree the notion is ridiculous though.

11 notes 

While we are on the topic…

And actually, while we’re on the topic, I think it’s kind of twisted how the whole popular narrative around Jolie’s mastectomy bypassed all the science and went straight to how this was a victory for feminism. As valid as discussions about the political and social ramifications are (after all, we live in an increasingly political environment), we should probably at least make an effort not to ignore everything else.

Angelina Jolie Missed an Important Opportunity

While I respect Angelina Jolie’s personal decision to have a prophylactic mastectomy, I fear she has given the wrong impression to millions of women with a family history of breast cancer or those who carry a BRCA gene mutation. She missed an important opportunity to share vital information about this gut wrenching decision that women wrestle with.


I’m one of those women. In fact, my family history for breast cancer is so strong that we’ve been studied by two major universities. We are one of the largest known families who carry the BRCA1 gene mutation in North America. I chose against elective mastectomy, and I think it’s important to explain why.


I understand the pain, suffering, and fear caused by cancer. I’m an ovarian cancer survivor and my beloved sister has beaten breast cancer three times. We lost our mom way too soon to pancreatic cancer, and many women on both sides of my family have had their lives cut short by cancer—breast and ovarian.


I also understand that Jolie did not make her decision lightly, and I’m confident it was the best decision for her. But I worry that the recent press is giving women the impression that Jolie’s choice is the right one for them. The fact is, it probably isn’t.

Turns out this whole breast cancer/mastectomy thing is not just a feminism issue, but a scientific one too. Super serious FYI.

1 note 

Murphy’s Law in Action #6908

Whenever you step outside your house without your keys, even for just ten minutes, someone will definitely lock the door behind you.

Yay, an answer from a psychology major! :D That’s would certainly be the standard, generic answer, but the first part of the answer is kind of what I’m addressing. What does “some” mean? And how do we know that? Those are not rhetorical questions; I’m sure there are many publications on the subject and any links would be appreciated. … The thing, though, is when we study separated twins, do we attribute all (most? some?) similarities in behaviour to genetics? If so, why? Did researchers consider that it might be the result of common environmental factors (or other possibilities)? How does it address those possibilities, if any? Are there other ways that we attempt to separate genetic and environmental factors of personality that I am unaware of? When will the questions stop?! Thanks for answering!

Yay, an answer from a psychology major! :D


That’s would certainly be the standard, generic answer, but the first part of the answer is kind of what I’m addressing. What does “some” mean? And how do we know that? Those are not rhetorical questions; I’m sure there are many publications on the subject and any links would be appreciated.


… The thing, though, is when we study separated twins, do we attribute all (most? some?) similarities in behaviour to genetics? If so, why? Did researchers consider that it might be the result of common environmental factors (or other possibilities)? How does it address those possibilities, if any? Are there other ways that we attempt to separate genetic and environmental factors of personality that I am unaware of? When will the questions stop?!


Thanks for answering!

I have a terrible webcam, but wonderful bed hair. :D

I have a terrible webcam, but wonderful bed hair. :D

3 notes 

Fat, not weight.

I really think we should stop calling it “losing weight”. Nobody wants to lose weight, as far as I can tell. They actually want to lose fat. Not water, not bone density, not muscle. Just fat. Except calling it “losing weight” puts the focus on the wrong thing and a lot of people measure their progress by the number on their scale. This is especially problematic because muscle weighs more than fat; if you replace fat with muscle, you’ll probably look smaller, but weigh more.


Words are powerful things.

1 note 

Really starting to wonder…

Is there such a thing as human nature? Or are some parts of how we’re nurtured in how we think and behave just really pervasive globally? How would we even be able to differentiate?

… On a corollary, what implication does the true answer to this have for things like personality studies on twins separated at birth? Can we throw those out?

2 notes 

proud-atheist: My thoughts on Missionaries..http://proud-atheist.tumblr.com Not a new thought, but: This is a reflection of one of the biggest problems (and not just with religious belief). Undoubtedly magnified when we’re talking about religion, but it’s quite problematic that we can be so invested in our beliefs. We can be so emotionally invested in something we hold to be true that we take all statements that contradict it to be an attack on our very person. Instead of asking why the other person thinks we’re wrong - and God forbid, potentially even thanking them for correcting an error in our thinking, we get defensive and dig in deep, automatically putting the other person on the offensive just to get their point across. And this goes both ways. Sometimes we get defensive because the other person immediately makes us feel like we must be stupid for holding such an obviously wrong belief that a concession that we are incorrect is almost impossible. That doesn’t (in itself) make us stupid; we may just be in need of some serious exploration of our belief to either more strongly affirm or cast some doubt on what we thought we knew. … Speaking of God(s) though, I still don’t understand how one makes the jump from “there is a creator” to “the God described in my religion exists”. Not the same question at all, but they usually gets treated that way.

proud-atheist:

My thoughts on Missionaries..
http://proud-atheist.tumblr.com

Not a new thought, but:


This is a reflection of one of the biggest problems (and not just with religious belief). Undoubtedly magnified when we’re talking about religion, but it’s quite problematic that we can be so invested in our beliefs. We can be so emotionally invested in something we hold to be true that we take all statements that contradict it to be an attack on our very person. Instead of asking why the other person thinks we’re wrong - and God forbid, potentially even thanking them for correcting an error in our thinking, we get defensive and dig in deep, automatically putting the other person on the offensive just to get their point across.


And this goes both ways. Sometimes we get defensive because the other person immediately makes us feel like we must be stupid for holding such an obviously wrong belief that a concession that we are incorrect is almost impossible. That doesn’t (in itself) make us stupid; we may just be in need of some serious exploration of our belief to either more strongly affirm or cast some doubt on what we thought we knew.


… Speaking of God(s) though, I still don’t understand how one makes the jump from “there is a creator” to “the God described in my religion exists”. Not the same question at all, but they usually gets treated that way.

17 notes 

How I know I’m getting old #3509

I got injured and I actually intend on resting as long as I was told to.

1 note 

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

— Eleanor Roosevelt


Pretty sure I think about this quote more and more every single day.