Myfandomreality - Tumblr Posts
TEEN WOLF MOVIE SPOILERS.
No actually it does leave me speechless that Jeff Davis actually decided the perfect ending for a traumatised victim of rape and torture with a paralysing fear of fire was to burn alive sacrificing himself for characters who quite frankly haven't and wouldn't do that for him.
I mean besides the fact that the show dictates the Nogitsune can't be killed, only trapped, if anything it would've made the most sense for it to be Allison, Parrish or Scott who died. Allison because the Nogitsune brought her back and she realistically shouldn't be alive anyway and that 'full circle' makes more sense than Derek's supposed 'full circle.' Scott because he's a True Alpha and supposedly oh-so-powerful and meaningful and always doing The Most for everyone. Parrish because he's, again, dead, a Hellhound and the one doing the killing. Logically him burning up with the Nogitsune makes the most sense out of the three.
Jeff Davis killed Derek Hale solely for the purpose of killing Derek Hale and don't let him pretend otherwise.
This is your daily reminder that accessible bathrooms are not just for disabled people, and that disability has no limits and is not often visually obvious.
Accessible bathrooms are also often equipped for parents and for people who need temporary assistance. Single fathers, people who've had surgery, people who are sick and need the support rails and additional space, ect.
Accessible bathrooms are for everyone, and I'm sick of seeing fellow disabled people shaming others when we as a community know better than anyone that disability is not always obvious, and accessibility should be the standard, not the exception.
The real issue is the fact that there's only ever, at most, one accessible bathroom. What we should be campaigning for is the normalisation of having at least two accessible bathrooms, so the people who need it aren't restricted to waiting or subjecting themselves to a non-accessible bathroom.
If the only way you can validate or present your perspective is with threats, aggression and anonymous hate mail then your argument is invalid and didn't have a sound basis to begin with.
I've always said that X vs Y discussions should always be enacted as if you're in court. You present proven facts, you maintain composure, you listen when the opposition speaks.
Telling people you hope they die or wishing violence on their loved ones or spamming them with hate mail quite literally accomplishes nothing. You haven't and won't change their minds. You're not presenting anything of substance for them to actually look at and evaluate. You're only ensuring they don't listen to you on principle and gain prejudice against your entire perspective.
If you want someone to try a slice of cake and like it, you don't tackle them and try to violently shove it down their throats. You show it to them, you tell them about it, and why you like it. The same applies when you're presenting your perspective on something.