Ego: Cur Terram Perdes?

I’m supposed to write a paper on the Protestant Revolution and Catholic Counter-Reformation.  Somehow my notes turned into this.  It’s probably blasphemy and whatever the historical equivalent is.  I’m not sorry.

Note: The phrase “the chart” refers to the graph in iamretrograde’s post, titled “Comparisons of Intimate Partner Violence Against Various Categories.”

I did a reverse image search on the chart, followed by searching for the text. This led me to this site http://chart-mining.com/comparison-of-intimate-partner-violence-against-various-categories/, which has the graph followed by a source. They source it as being from http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02 . I followed the link, but it didn’t have the image, just a page telling me that I could use the website’s search bar to help find what I was looking for.

I tried searching for some of the keywords used on the image with the site’s search bar and discovered two things:

1. The site has an extreme anti-LGBT+ agenda and is extremely biased.

2. I could not find any mention of the supposed statistics. I did find this article: http://downloads.frc.org/EF/EF08L44.pdf , which says, “ ‘Domestic violence is reported to occur in about 11 percent of lesbian homes,’ the article [this is referencing another study] states. It goes on to claim that this is ,about half the rate of 20 percent reported by heterosexual women.’ However, this comparison fails to note that the highest rates of domestic violence among heterosexuals occur among those who are divorced, separated, cohabiting, or in sexual relationships outside of marriage; married women experience the lowest rates of domestic violence of any household arrangement.” Which, as far as I can tell, is claiming that this is study doesn’t count because heterosexual married women are less likely to experience domestic violence than unmarried heterosexual women who have a male partner. This may be true, I’m not sure, but I fail to see how this proves their point. In addition, these figures are significantly lower in both cases than the figures given on the graph.

I then looked up the article they reference. It’s here: http://www.glma.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.viewPage&pageID=691 . The organization publishing it, the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association (yes, they will also be biased) has removed the statistic and didn’t cite their sources, so that’s mostly a dead end. I found a few other sources, but all of them have various flaws (convenience sampling, over-specificity, etc.) that make them not useful.

Overall, I could not find anything to back up the statistics in that graph. If we accept the statistics provided by an anti-LGBT+ organization, who have a vested interest in the opposite result, then we have clear evidence that domestic violence occurs at lower rates among two-woman couples than one-man one woman couples. Since two-woman couples would have twice as many opportunities to occur, this would seem to indicate that, from a domestic violence point of view, it is safer for a woman to be in a relationship with another woman than with a man. Furthermore, it is safer overall for everyone than that chart indicates. (This does not mean the given statistics are good! However, they are less bad.)

If someone can find a source to back up the chart, I will absolutely reconsider this; until then, it looks like its claims are false.

Heterosexuality is Stockholm Syndrome

if i ever misgender you:

it is not on purpose i promise

im very sorry

tell me your correct pronouns and ill use them

spray me with cold water

Harry Potter is the earliest one I can think of. There were probably others before that, but I can’t think of them off the top of my head.

what was your first special interest, that you can remember?

When you’re ten years old, a Hogwarts professor comes to teach you how to cast a Patronus. People were worried at first -- they said ten was too young. You can’t even go to Hogwarts. But the grass around your house could be dangerous, and besides, the consequences for mistakes aren’t that bad.

Your natural Patronus is your starting Pokèmon. A lot of people have Rattata Patroni, but not all. Those with more uncommon Patroni get special attention from the Professors. Some of them are given a special spellbook they call a Pokèdex and told to find as many different Patroni as they can.

Patroni want nothing more than to protect their casters from harm. To do that, they practice against other Patroni. This is called a battle. The winning Patronus becomes stronger and better able to protect its caster.

Besides the Patroni of known casters, there are others that wander Great Britain. No one knows quite where they come from. Some say they are the Patroni of people killed in the Battle of Hogwarts. Others say they formed spontaneously from happy memories. Regardless, they roam the lands. Some casters tame them with spells -- a burst of red light, and then they will serve you loyally.

A few Patroni of immense power roam Great Britain as well. They are said to have belonged to tremendously powerful wizards. Over time, they come to be known as “legendary.”

Godric Gryffindor’s is known as Articuno. Only the bravest dare to venture to its frozen home. Ho-oh, guardian of the skies, is mastered by Helga Hufflepuff, protecting Hogwarts with the help of a Patronus. Salazar Slytherin’s is referred to as Rayquaza. It knows how to manipulate others to get its way. Rowena Ravenclaw’s is named Giratina. Its alternate dimension fascinated her, and even today the brightest students of her house are encouraged to seek out and learn from Giratina. Merlin, as a valuer of ideals, cast a Patronus known as Zekrom.

There were others, of course. For centuries, there had been thirty others. But then, shortly after the Battle of Hogwarts, a new legendary Pokèmon appeared out of the remains of Lord Voldemort.

Its name was Yveltal.

Pokemon, but with patronuses

I… have no idea how this would work I’m sorry. Anyone want to reblog this with their thoughts?

My favorite one is, “come on Star Wars be original,” as if putting a man in the lead would be cutting edge stuff. Anyway…

Usually by inquiring why, as this does, based on the definition of feminism, seem a little bit strange.

You mean by saying that sex should be consensual? Because that’s basically all that feminists are saying.

I've never seen anyone try to control women like a group of feminists

GOP: We must follow the Constitution THE THE LETTER ALL THE TIME NO MATTER WHAT BECAUSE THE FOUNDING FATHERS!

Me: Oh, okay. Glad you mentioned that. See, here's this thing in the Constitution where it says that the president shall appoint Supreme Court Justices, and now that there's a vacancy on the Supreme Court, President Obama's Constitutional duty is to appoint a new justice.

GOP: But Obama is in his last year of office!

Me: You mean like Ronald Reagan was when he nominated Anthony Kennedy?

GOP: But

Me: Yeah, go ahead and say something critical of Ronald Reagan.

GOP: Well. He. It. See. Ronald Rrrrreee...

Me: I'll wait. Take your time.

GOP: RrRrrrOoooonnnnaLllddddddd.......

Me: Are you okay?

GOP: Rrrrrreeeaaagggg gggg gggg gggg ggbbzzt bzzt bzzzzzt

Me: Are ... are you having a system freeze?

GOP: (a)bort, (r)etry, (f)ail?

Me: Let's go with fail. That's what you're best at.

Imagining a story in your head:

Writing down the story: