Highbrowandbeard

Beards, Books, Buddhism.
rt58:

l0kasenna:

officialnatasharomanoff:

slecnaztemnot:

nmscares:

#DidYouKnow #Deaf #DeafAwareness #education #SignLanguage #advocacy #NMSCares

This is actually sadly relevant. I had a lecture this summer about sign languages and Deaf culture and when I was finished, one hearing girl from the audience stayed behind to ask me some more question.
She asked me: “And your parents use sign language, right?” Like it was the most obvious thing in the world and why is she even asking this, of course my parents must know sign language.
"No… They don’t, actually."
"And how do you communicate, then?"
"Talking?"
"But… isn’t that complicated for you?"
"It is, sometimes."
"They probably didn’t have time for it…" she said. And I haven’t the heart to tell her that my father was offered sign language courses several times, that I offered to teach them some signs and that they always refused.
But I did told her: “It is not that rare. Most of deaf people I know have hearing parents who don’t sign.”
It’s the sad truth. People are willing to pay for surgeries to “repair” their children, but they are not willing to learn something to communicate with them.

i’d like to add onto this with my own personal experience, too. i was born hearing, but as soon as i was diagnosed as HoH, my parents didn’t do anything to learn ASL. they were quick to put me in classes, but they wouldn’t when i suggested to them that they take the classes with me so that we could learn.
i’ve tried to teach my mom how to sign numerous times, but she always says that “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks,” to which i tell her that she can learn, she just doesn’t want to. which is true. neither of my parents want to learn how to sign, but they want me to be able to hear perfectly so they don’t have to repeat themselves.
little do they know that their frustration with me not being able to hear them would be solved if they would just learn how to sign. maybe signing something to me once instead of repeating themselves four times and then getting mad would be more beneficial.

I’m absolutely shocked at this, it’s never crossed my mind that many parents wouldn’t even try to meet their hard of hearing kids halfway.

my mom literally dropped everything to learn sign language when she found out my sister and I were deaf and my dad refused to bother because we needed to function in “the real world”

rt58:

l0kasenna:

officialnatasharomanoff:

slecnaztemnot:

nmscares:

#DidYouKnow #Deaf #DeafAwareness #education #SignLanguage #advocacy #NMSCares

This is actually sadly relevant. I had a lecture this summer about sign languages and Deaf culture and when I was finished, one hearing girl from the audience stayed behind to ask me some more question.

She asked me: “And your parents use sign language, right?” Like it was the most obvious thing in the world and why is she even asking this, of course my parents must know sign language.

"No… They don’t, actually."

"And how do you communicate, then?"

"Talking?"

"But… isn’t that complicated for you?"

"It is, sometimes."

"They probably didn’t have time for it…" she said. And I haven’t the heart to tell her that my father was offered sign language courses several times, that I offered to teach them some signs and that they always refused.

But I did told her: “It is not that rare. Most of deaf people I know have hearing parents who don’t sign.”

It’s the sad truth. People are willing to pay for surgeries to “repair” their children, but they are not willing to learn something to communicate with them.

i’d like to add onto this with my own personal experience, too. i was born hearing, but as soon as i was diagnosed as HoH, my parents didn’t do anything to learn ASL. they were quick to put me in classes, but they wouldn’t when i suggested to them that they take the classes with me so that we could learn.

i’ve tried to teach my mom how to sign numerous times, but she always says that “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks,” to which i tell her that she can learn, she just doesn’t want to. which is true. neither of my parents want to learn how to sign, but they want me to be able to hear perfectly so they don’t have to repeat themselves.

little do they know that their frustration with me not being able to hear them would be solved if they would just learn how to sign. maybe signing something to me once instead of repeating themselves four times and then getting mad would be more beneficial.

I’m absolutely shocked at this, it’s never crossed my mind that many parents wouldn’t even try to meet their hard of hearing kids halfway.

my mom literally dropped everything to learn sign language when she found out my sister and I were deaf and my dad refused to bother because we needed to function in “the real world”

(via welltheregoesyoursociallife)

  • All is full of love. Yes Bjork. Yes.

scenicroutes:

first of all, apologies for the long post.

these are just a few images, text posts, and tags i nabbed from a thirty-second spin through the “homeless person” search. there are a ton of fucked-up things in that tag - a lot of the “look at this hilarious, weird-looking man in dirty clothing holding up a funny sign” variety. a lot of self-congratulatory “i just bought lunch for a homeless person!”

but this, equating ugliness to homelessness, is specifically what i wanted to comment on.

probably the weirdest part of this, for me, is the use of “homeless person.” that is hard-won terminology brought into use by activists who wanted more humanizing, sympathetic words than bum, vagrant, hobo, beggar, panhandler, whatever. and it’s plain to see here that even that attempt at humanization has been co-opted into a slur. most of these text posts don’t specify what “looking like a homeless person” actually entails, but it’s always implied to be the diametric opposite of beautiful. it’s considered a miracle that someone who “dresses like a homeless person” could appear attractive. and maybe that’s because all three of the people pictured here are wearing expensive designer clothes cut and coloured to look worn-out.

people who are underhoused do not all look the same. they do not all dress the same. the man with the long beard who sits on a street corner with a cardboard sign and a change cup is not the face of every homeless person. but he is deserving of your compassion. and compassion means not rendering him synonymous with ugliness, with undesirability. 

i can’t tell you how many times i’ve overheard people congratulating themselves for tossing a fiver into a change cup or passing their leftover lunch to the guy sitting in front of the restaurant. i can’t tell you how many times i’ve heard people waxing poetic about “helping the homeless” without any knowledge or understanding of what that might actually mean. and i can’t tell you how many times i’ve heard people laughing about how they “don’t want to look homeless” or someone’s beard makes him “look like a crazy homeless guy.” so many people harbour so much hatred for people they claim to want to help.

homeless people are beautiful and important and valuable and they deserve so much more than your condescension and your patronizing and your ridicule.

end rant.

(via welltheregoesyoursociallife)

temporarilyeuropean:

semiserious:

Here’s a weird story. That site Who Dated Who lists Nathan Lane as a rumored ex-boyfriend of Ricky Martin. Naturally I decided to investigate. Turn out t was a fake rumor from Perez Hilton, go figure. Somehow though I decided i wanted to read Lane’s coming out interview. I Googled and found old back issues of The Advocate archived in Google Books. 
So I read the interview, and then skim through the rest of the issue. It’s interesting to see where the gay press was in 1999. Apparently Keith Richards is a giant homophobe and Jon Stewart has always been pretty cool. Go figure. 
The advertisements are still the kind you’ll see in gay mags today: booze, cigarettes, HIV meds. But then half way though I start seeing a lot of ads for vague financial services, and I don’t really pay attention to them. That is until I see this one. I assumed it was some horrible, horrible joke about negative to positive cash flow, but then I see the word “Viatical settlement.” Then I realize that term is in all of these ads. I have no idea what is, so of course I got to Wikipedia. 
Turns out Viatical settlements were a once little used arrangement where you could sell your life insurance policy for cash up front, and then the buyer would get the full payout when you died. 
They’re legal, but weren’t very prominent until the ’80s when AIDS took off. Since you know gay marriage wasn’t a thing, gay men often didn’t have anyone to have on their life insurance except their parents, people they may have been estranged from or who might not have needed the money. 
So this entire industry pops up around Viatical settlements. Gay men got some of their life insurance money when they were still alive, kicked the bucket from AIDS a little while later, then the buyer cashed in. 
“From the perspective of the investor, purchasing a vatical is similar to buying a zero coupon bond with an uncertain maturity date [however an annual maintenance fee is payable i.e. the policy premium],” says. Wiki. “The return depends on the seller’s life expectancy and when he or she dies.”
Gay mens deaths: just like buying a zero coupon bond!
And, ok, on one level, great, it provided a much needed way to get money for gay men dying of a disease. On the other this was sadly the easiest way for them to get money. An entire financial services industry arose around the deaths of hundreds of thousands of gay men. 
People found a way to profit off of the AIDS crisis. Like holy shit. There’s people still to this day who probably have vacation homes they bought because gay men died. 
America right there. 
Keep in mind this issues is dated 1999. This was just 15 years ago. 

People found a way to profit off of the AIDS crisis. Like holy shit. There’s people still to this day who probably have vacation homes they bought because gay men died. 
This word “Viatical” is something new for me, and I thank you for that teaching moment, but let’s get serious. People have always profited off of the AIDS crisis. The first ACT UP protest was on Wall Street in 1987 and it demanded that AZT prices be lowered. People are still profiting off of it. The pharmaceutical industry still profits from every new HIV infection as well as anyone who manages their viral load with medication. Today, the really stunningly, elegantly pernicious thing that Big Pharma managed to do is medicate the negative body as well as the Poz body with the same drug (Truvada). I mean, I’m grateful for PrEP as a prevention tool because it really does seem to be working and I hope that it does on a sustainable level but I do find it kind of unavoidably, cosmically fucked that risk reduction and prevention efforts are so poor everywhere that instead of anyone in power following the advice of its own government and reducing stigma by repealing HIV de-criminalization laws, or abolishing abstinence only sex education programs, or even not de-funding or decreasing funding for HIV research and prevention, or even not fucking criminalizing carrying condoms, Gilead sees a great untapped market and says “I have a solution!” and it coincidentally makes the neg body profitable in the same way the poz one is (a client for life if you seroconvert!). Solutions that cost the US government money are a no, solutions that end in paid taxes are a yes.
I guess what I’m saying is that “Abuse of power comes as no surprise.” And that we should not be surprised that some people are still buying their vacation homes thanks to each and every seroconversion.

temporarilyeuropean:

semiserious:

Here’s a weird story. That site Who Dated Who lists Nathan Lane as a rumored ex-boyfriend of Ricky Martin. Naturally I decided to investigate. Turn out t was a fake rumor from Perez Hilton, go figure. Somehow though I decided i wanted to read Lane’s coming out interview. I Googled and found old back issues of The Advocate archived in Google Books

So I read the interview, and then skim through the rest of the issue. It’s interesting to see where the gay press was in 1999. Apparently Keith Richards is a giant homophobe and Jon Stewart has always been pretty cool. Go figure. 

The advertisements are still the kind you’ll see in gay mags today: booze, cigarettes, HIV meds. But then half way though I start seeing a lot of ads for vague financial services, and I don’t really pay attention to them. That is until I see this one. I assumed it was some horrible, horrible joke about negative to positive cash flow, but then I see the word “Viatical settlement.” Then I realize that term is in all of these ads. I have no idea what is, so of course I got to Wikipedia. 

Turns out Viatical settlements were a once little used arrangement where you could sell your life insurance policy for cash up front, and then the buyer would get the full payout when you died. 

They’re legal, but weren’t very prominent until the ’80s when AIDS took off. Since you know gay marriage wasn’t a thing, gay men often didn’t have anyone to have on their life insurance except their parents, people they may have been estranged from or who might not have needed the money. 

So this entire industry pops up around Viatical settlements. Gay men got some of their life insurance money when they were still alive, kicked the bucket from AIDS a little while later, then the buyer cashed in. 

From the perspective of the investor, purchasing a vatical is similar to buying a zero coupon bond with an uncertain maturity date [however an annual maintenance fee is payable i.e. the policy premium],” says. Wiki. “The return depends on the seller’s life expectancy and when he or she dies.”

Gay mens deaths: just like buying a zero coupon bond!

And, ok, on one level, great, it provided a much needed way to get money for gay men dying of a disease. On the other this was sadly the easiest way for them to get money. An entire financial services industry arose around the deaths of hundreds of thousands of gay men.

People found a way to profit off of the AIDS crisis. Like holy shit. There’s people still to this day who probably have vacation homes they bought because gay men died. 

America right there. 

Keep in mind this issues is dated 1999. This was just 15 years ago. 

People found a way to profit off of the AIDS crisis. Like holy shit. There’s people still to this day who probably have vacation homes they bought because gay men died. 

This word “Viatical” is something new for me, and I thank you for that teaching moment, but let’s get serious. People have always profited off of the AIDS crisis. The first ACT UP protest was on Wall Street in 1987 and it demanded that AZT prices be lowered. People are still profiting off of it. The pharmaceutical industry still profits from every new HIV infection as well as anyone who manages their viral load with medication. Today, the really stunningly, elegantly pernicious thing that Big Pharma managed to do is medicate the negative body as well as the Poz body with the same drug (Truvada). I mean, I’m grateful for PrEP as a prevention tool because it really does seem to be working and I hope that it does on a sustainable level but I do find it kind of unavoidably, cosmically fucked that risk reduction and prevention efforts are so poor everywhere that instead of anyone in power following the advice of its own government and reducing stigma by repealing HIV de-criminalization laws, or abolishing abstinence only sex education programs, or even not de-funding or decreasing funding for HIV research and prevention, or even not fucking criminalizing carrying condoms, Gilead sees a great untapped market and says “I have a solution!” and it coincidentally makes the neg body profitable in the same way the poz one is (a client for life if you seroconvert!). Solutions that cost the US government money are a no, solutions that end in paid taxes are a yes.

I guess what I’m saying is that “Abuse of power comes as no surprise.” And that we should not be surprised that some people are still buying their vacation homes thanks to each and every seroconversion.

  • No idea how to edit tumblr posts properly. In any case, I should be worries about other shizz.
  • Tutoring in 11 hours and I am terrified. Send me
  • vibes and shit.
  • You guys <3 Thank you. I feel them already. Deep inside me.
  • *nods*

penamerican:

In Ireland, 1922 a “Committee on Evil Literature” was created to ban works that were considered indecent, including ads for hair removal cream.