profile

25yrs/ m/ aries/ year of the dog/ animation major/ illustration minor/ nicks: rurounibug; baskerville

tabulas links

indoglish

September 8th, 2008

I'm so glad the fog is back. I want to roll around in all the cold aiiirrrrr.

These are for the eL, "Random Diary" sketch thread, btw. I'm not just weirdly being weird. I mean, okay, yes, but I'm doing it with purpose!

Also, ahurhurhur, Datsu.

rurounibug ; 01:24 AM|1 replies

September 7th, 2008

doodlepants

also here 

rurounibug ; 01:14 AM|3 replies

August 30th, 2008

I hate this new cp

The simple editor is gone.

I hate this new editor, with it's buttons and annoying formating and auto-spacing and what not.

Hate it.

rurounibug ; 04:23 PM|fine, ignore me

August 21st, 2008

onoz!

The tabulas user cp has changed! And the opt out link is gone! It still seems to be working as the simple editor (you know, where you have to type your own html tags and stuff) But now it has a "post as html" check box like you get when replying to entries. This might take me a bit to figure out.

I also can't find how to access the advanced editor, because while I hate it, it does (or used to, at least) preserve the indents when posting stories copy-pasted from MSword.

test:

itallics
bold
strikethrough

rurounibug ; 11:28 PM|fine, ignore me

August 21st, 2008

beautiful

Guys, I think I totally need a bedazzler. I could, like, bedazzle my bogu bag!

I don't know what else I could use it on, though.

I guess it would be a waste to get one just to sparkle up one bag.

Dang.

Joy to sad in two minutes.

rurounibug ; 04:26 AM|fine, ignore me

August 20th, 2008

I don't only watch TV

I'm reading Julia Serano's Whipping Girl. So far I'm finding it both interesting and obnoxious. Some of her new jargon is a little too much, especially when she recasts existing vocabulary and replaces it with what she would prefer. Sometimes I'm like, "Well, we already used X word for Y, but now X means B and A means Y? What the crap?"

And then theres arguements that seem forced, or where she only views and interprets an issue from one standpoint, and one that often seems to be setting up a hierarchy of oppression. For example, she states that MTF transexuals are considered a more serious threat to the value of masculinity over femininity, while FTM transexuals support it, and thats why effiminate boys and MTF transexuals are the subject of so much more medical and physchological research.

While I would argue that a sexist, transphobic establishment probably isn't respecting anyone's gender identity, and therefore isn't even framing male femininity in terms of femininity, but instead as failed masculinity. That male femininity isn't more interesting to researchers because femininity is more upsetting or threatening, but because men are almost always more interesting to the establishment than women, and thats how they're classifying people, despite anyone's actual indetity. They aren't seeing it as a femininity issue, but rather as male pathology. It's still mysogyny, except I think it's applied more to bodies than to expression.

I should probably say that I follow where most of the argument goes--it's just that I don't think the oppresion dice bounce quite the way she insists they do, even if they come up with the same number.

So to speak.

And then theres stuff thats just kind of weird. Like where she critizes 'gatekeepers' for valueing a small number of cissexuals over a large number of transexuals when they want to ensure someone coming to them for transition isn't suffering from some sort of delusion or other mental illness.

Although I would not argue against any of her experiences, how is any given doctor supposed to know shit about any given patient who comes to him? It's not a valueing of one population over the other, when the person in question cannot tell which population a patient is actually a part of yet.

It's just sort of weird the way she makes a big us vs. them situation out of an instance where it's actually more of a "any given trans identifying person is more likely to be trans than to be delusional", but just imagine the lawsuits if diagnoses based on odds? I've been watching these TLC awful worst case disease shows (well, I stumble across them, then can't look away) and everytime people are all, "OMG WTF, how could the doctors think it was just a cold just because it's a cold 95% of the time? OMG WTF?"

Now imagine if you let someone take hormones and get surgery, and it was one of those %5 times? Even over-the-counter topical drugs warn you test them on a small area first, just on the off chance of allergy or bad reaction. Or, hey, how about, "I gave him the anaestetic without checking allergies first, because most people are okay." or "OMG, you're valueing the small number of people with bad liver function over a healthy majority by making me get tests before handing over the drugs!"

I'm just saying.

While I don't doubt at all that medical proffesionals can have their own agendas and probably often implement them in ways that are detrimental, especially in the context of gender issues, I can't get on board with an argument that doesn't address what I think are obvious counter-arguments, or only follows the route that supports their own argument, in spite of other possible reasoning. Even if I'm on the book's side, it makes me think the author might not have a refutation. Or that she has her rant-blinkers on, which is sort of worse.

Actually, I probably shouldn't say anything, because she has sources and a bibliography and a scientific education, and I have a knee jerk reaction and can't spell. I'm also only halfway through the book, and she may be only pages away from pulling it together in way that wins me completely over. Who the crap knows.



In other news, Lucky's has awesome junk food. I have german chocolate cake mini cupcakes. I did not know such wonders existed in this world until Lucky's! Nobody ever told me!

rurounibug ; 12:25 AM|5 replies

August 15th, 2008

watching you watch the olympics

All the fuss going on about how young the Chinese gymnastics team looks is hilarious. But hilarious in that way that makes me want to smack people. Now, I'm not saying that there isn't something weird going on, because ESPN was talking about some documentation issues, but I changed the channel, because I think it's kind of bratty to call "Because your Dad's the ump!" as soon as things don't go your way. (And tonight one of the Chinese girls got scored higher than the announcers would have liked, at which they started puffing suspicion about that, too.)

And hello, the US team looks young, too. Gymnasts tend to. Add to that that Americans always think Asian people look way younger than they are, and there ya go. And yes, sometimes Asians are four foot seven, even at sixteen. I know a few girls (in Jakarta) who are around nineteen but look about thirteen. Or twelve. And if you're actively screening for tiny bendy people, hell yeah you could end up with a whole troop of girls like that.

rurounibug ; 12:54 AM|fine, ignore me

tagboard

blogs and journals

fiction

the layout