#hardcore environmentalist
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
lilyhellbender · 1 month ago
Text
0 notes
startheskelaton · 5 days ago
Note
Hello! Love your art! Hope this new year starts well for you!
May I ask: How do you imagine SG Soundwave and Shockwave to be like? I know we don't have a lot of SG Shockwave so I'm curious how you see him (and Soundwave obv) and how it affects your story🤔
Well I think in my version of the character, he would still be a mad scientist in a way because that’s always fun. Still an outspoken senator, he was seen as a bumbling quack because he wanted to make inventions that helped the world instead of ones that could be used to make money.
I imagine he was a victim to a forced empurata surgery, however was saved during it. While his body was changed, his mind was able to be saved and stay mostly unchanged. You know Battaray Bill? I image it’s a situation like that for him, yes he’s technically more powerful, he lost his own autonomy and due to the war, he can’t exactly change himself back.
Soundwave on the other hand was seen as a hippy. A hardcore environmentalist that spent more time running from the feds with his caravan of wayward minicons. Seeing the outrageous acts of hypocrisy done by the powers at be, he became a freedom fighter of the Decepticon alliance.
I think that their shared love of social improvement and hatred for greed made them incredibly close friends and opened the door to a much more intimate relationship as conjunxs.
68 notes · View notes
stele3 · 11 months ago
Note
So given your post about making people believe something they don’t actually believe on some level, what do you think of all the stories people tell of (say) parents whom they swear were radical leftist hippies until they started watching Fox News, and they turned into diehard Trumpists?
Lemme use my mom as an example.
My mother used to be an environmental activist. That was her big thing in the 90’s, was the environment. She planted trees and bushes around my grade school. She took me and my brother to the local farmer’s market to collect signatures to close a local nuclear power plant. (Not saying nuclear power is antithetical to the environment, just saying that she felt it was and she was very involved.)
Now, there was a subsection of the environmentalist movement that focused a lot on population growth and how unsustainable it is. Mom got hooked into that. Pretty soon she was talking about how we needed to curtail population growth before we ran out of natural resources.
Then, gradually, it became about immigration. Immigrants drive a lot of the population growth in the U.S. She became a hardcore anti-immigration activist and joined the Minutemen.
None of this was designed by anyone. No one person sat down and planned out how to radicalize my mom from being an environmental activist to a right-wing nation. But this represents exactly the kind of path you want to take if you’re trying to manipulate someone into doing what you want: you find some part of what they already believe (the environment needs our help) and hook that into the next step (population growth is bad), and then the next (eco-fascism), and so on. At every step you have to make the person feel good about their beliefs, and challenging their beliefs drastically doesn’t usually work; you want to feed the “I was right” loop, but introduce just enough of your own agenda that they incorporate it into their own beliefs.
My mom wasn’t an especially radical leftist hippie, but she was definitely a pro-choice environmentalist. Now she’s, well. She gettin’ ready to vote for Trump again.
117 notes · View notes
autistichalsin · 3 months ago
Text
I think a lot of non-Americans don't realize just how deeply meat eating is tied in with conservatism here, and a lot of Americans don't realize just how much that isn't a thing in a lot other cultures. Like yes, duh, there are a lot of cultures where due to the local ecologies, a diet made up of a lot of meat is the norm. But what I'm talking about here is the specifically American style of meat eating.
Here, not only does meat-eating get conflated with gender, but it does with national identity as well.
Meat eating is seen as masculine; vegetables (and sometimes even just sweets!!) are seen as feminine. "Soyboy" and "soyjak" are called such because soy is seen as feminine, partly for being a vegetable, and partially because of some fearmongering over the estrogen content of plants, especially soy. The most common rationale for vegetarianism- compassion for animals- is relentlessly mocked, and stereotyped to be for teenage girls in a rebellious phase. In fact, there was a national chain restaurant a few years ago that introduced a veggie burger to its menu and advertised it as "for when you teenage daughter is going through a phase." South Park had an entire episode mocking the main characters for a temporary decision to not eat meat, saying it would literally make them grow vaginas, because veggies are for women and women are STOOPID.
Further, meat eating gets conflated with American identity, particularly if it's beef. People make all kinds of noise about supporting farmers (even though, hint, there's a 97/100 chance your steak did NOT come from a cow farmed by a local, small farm, but instead by a corporation, unless you specifically go out of your way to shop local). And it's no coincidence that so many Americans are so against even token efforts at environmentalism considering just the strain ranching and the infrastructure to support it (I.E. growing feed for the cows) takes on the environment. Environmentalists get branded as woke commies because trying to take even the tiniest efforts to stop ranching from fucking up the environment (take a look at what's happening in the Amazon due to ranching, fascinating stuff. And yes by fascinating, I do in fact mean horrifying) means less beef and that means you HATE AMERICA and just want our MEN to be a bunch of weak SOYBOYS.
This insanity goes so deep, in fact, that multiple hardcore Christian cults literally instruct their members that their kids expressing a desire to become vegetarian or eat less meat is a sign they are being brainwashed by satanist cults.
America has set up this ridiculous, bizarre, utterly insane meat-worshipping culture where tossing a slab of beef on a grill and charring it is seen as the epitome of masculinity and Americanness and being a Good Christian, where skipping meat for ONE MEAL will turn you into a degenerate satanist leftie commie soyboy, and it's as hilarious as it is frightening. There are even movements to ban "Meatless Mondays" from public schools (some school districts will pick a single day of the week not to serve meat in the cafeteria) because it will "corrupt the youth" and/or is "unhealthy" for them to not eat meat for one meal a week. It's absolutely bizarre beyond words.
41 notes · View notes
sentientsky · 1 year ago
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
i might be a hardcore environmentalist,,,but got DAMN
134 notes · View notes
anarchistfrogposting · 1 year ago
Note
I don't consider myself an anarchist but i'm pretty sympathetic, there's just some stuff i'm not sure yet would work well under anarchism as i understood it after reading the bread book.
What would incentivize people to work, for example, at oil rigs away from their communities doing dangerous work?
Would it be that they'd have a smaller expectation for how long they're suposed to work? Like, instead of you working 9-5 for 8 months instead you work 9-5 for 4 months and then can just do things you like the rest of the year?
Yes hi hello! This post re-emerged from the depths of accidental deletion!! I’m getting the bus to go get a burrito so let me talk about this one!!
Kropotkin actually talked about dangerous work; after all, some work is just inherently and unavoidably a bit more dangerous than others: so what’s the point? Why bother?
To start, resource extraction is going to be inherent to any industrial economy, but it’s worth pointing out that when you eliminate a lot of overproduction, an inefficiency inherent to capitalist economy, the demand for extraction is going to shoot down in a big way. That’s a big reason why a lot of the more hardcore environmentalist movements have been radical leftist ones; it’s features inherent to capitalism which are bringing about the downfall of the environment which sustains us.
Another big consideration to make is that a lot of the danger of these fields arises solely because the demands of the profit motive incentivise management to overwork/underpay/cut back on or wholesale eliminate critical safety measures; there’s a reason why unions and collectives in those fields are such critical players in the constant battle to keep people safe.
There are quite a few fields in the domestic/public sector, as well (think electricians, certain waste management professions etc.) which are (and were more so in the past) fairly dangerous but are not generally regarded as such because they’re regulated well in the public domain/have very strong unions/have otherwise strong safety regulation.
This stuff gets safer and safer as we improve the automation of our economy, as well.
It’s worth remembering as well that those remote professions and operations are, in a way, their own communities, as well, and for some people travelling long distances away for more lonesome work is quite an attractive prospect; I once knew a geologist who said he found the relative isolation quite peaceful. My great grandad did some remote mining and he always talked quite positively about it when I knew him (although this is very anecdotal - if anybody in the field wants to weigh in I’d be more than happy to hear what you think).
About hours as well;
If there’s no profit motive, then industrial processes are going to be driven by how to do them as safely, efficiently, and easily (among other stuff). The demand for hours is going to be a lot less tough because you’re going to be able to have more workers and source better equipment without worrying about how it will cut into your bottom line; so yes, the hours will be shorter and the shifts less demanding, with a greater support network and safety network when shit hits the fan. All of this, of course, makes this kind of work a lot more attractive.
But what about dangerous work in general? Why would anyone put themselves in danger?
You just have to look at the tremendous danger that volunteers face to understand that humans don’t really need a profit motive to put their lives on the line to better their communities and the world, or to feel part of something greater than themselves. Not everyone is going to want to do that, and that’s ok, but some people really derive a lot of happiness and fulfilment from dangerous work.
Humanity is flexible and diverse; working together to champion that is our strength, and it always has been.
202 notes · View notes
missveryvery · 1 year ago
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
Halsin is pure husband material but he probably doesn't believe in marriage which just makes me more unwell about him. Larian was fucking insane to go "here's several people trying to bone you, each will be written differently. you will be able to tell which one is healthy about it"
"Whatever, let's see what this dork ass leaf nerd has to say"
Five lines of dialogue later: "WHO MADE FUN OF YOU FOR LIKING HONEY? I'LL KILL THEM."
Just wiping away tears when he tells me about the ducks, like "please don't kill me in my sleep, you're so nice"
Elf Druid Tav named Dithiva ("Dith"). Lady that seems normal and then you find out she's a hardcore, militant environmentalist with crazy eyes. Will make you absolutely disgusting tea. "Live, Laugh, Love" + "Nothing is more organic than murder :)" Supports animal wrongs. Displacer Beast can have little a murder, as a treat.
105 notes · View notes
tanadrin · 2 years ago
Text
two things about environmentalism as a political movement: one, no political movement, once it has accumulated policy wins (=power) ever goes, “well, all our problems are solved! time to dissolve ourselves :)” and since all politics is aesthetics, the grist for their ideological mill may find something that aesthetically resembles their previous raison d’etre, and latch on to that: opposing nuclear power because nuclear bombs are also a thing, for instance, even though nuclear power is actually pretty good for the environment. for the same reason, once your concerned mothers group gets the tuesday afternoon showings of hardcore pornography banned at the local preschool, they don’t go “job well done!” and quit; they start going after the next group of perverts, like furries or people who masturbate with the shades drawn and lights off to god-fearing porn about heterosexual reproduction
two, though: there will always be an incentive to skirt environmental regulations, even if those regulations are objectively a pretty good idea. air pollution is bad. it kills a ton of people! it used to make cities nigh-unlivable! water pollution is also really bad. but it’s much much cheaper to dump your excess chromium 6 in the local water supply than it is to dispose of it properly, and, well, economic incentives often point in pretty sharply amoral directions! this isn’t a capitalism thing, either; communist countries often have a pretty absymal environmental record, especially bc they frequently suppress political dissent, like environmentalist movements. it’s actually probably a good thing to have an activist segment of your society devoted to environmental issues, for the same reason it’s a good thing to have an activist segment of your society devoted to labor rights, or free speech, or any other issue of political or social equity.
141 notes · View notes
mur-art · 1 year ago
Note
Oooo, you have Jefferson hcs? I'd love to hear them if you're comfortable with that (not forced)
I definitely haven’t thought about this too much /s
TL;DR I feel like he’d be a great one-off character for the Table purely for comedic value. Dude is pathetic and his antics and attempts to convince others of his legitimate (totally legitimate, he swears) statehood would be hilarious.
Some art and HCs under the cut.
@freshwolfhell has lots of good Jeff HCs as well! A lot of these are the results of our discussions!
TW Discussion of weed (ofc) and other drugs
Tumblr media
I forgot if I posted this one or not; again, credit to @freshwolfhell for inspiring this silly comic.
-As the comic above implies, Jeff is sometimes the definition of political “horseshoe theory”; coming to agree with certain progressive/liberal values not because he understands them or agrees with them, but for his own completely unhinged reasons.
-Dude smokes so much weed. He’s just constantly surrounded by a haze. He also struggles with addictions to some harder drugs.
-He’s a hardcore conspiracy theorist. There aren’t many conspiracy theories he DOESN’T believe in, even ones that seemingly contradict each other.
-He lives in an RV deep in the forest. The RV is covered in moss and hasn’t been moved in at least 20 years. It’s at the end of a dirt road that’s impassable when it rains. He rarely leaves, but when he does, he drives an old beat up Subaru with a hundred somewhat contradictory political bumper stickers.
-He managed to rig up a setup for TV and shitty internet, but he’s very much stuck in the past technology-wise. He still rents DVDs and listens to the radio. His favorite pastime is listening to true crime or conspiracy podcasts, and/or watching news stories about how much California sucks.
-He may or may not frequently get mistaken for some type of cryptid.
-He used to work in the logging industry and he feels a lot of resentment at California and the “environmentalists,” who, in his opinion, ruined his life by lobbying against the industry, leading to the downfall of so many of “his” towns and plunging him into poverty. He’s extremely bitter about this, as well as every other wrong (imagined or real) committed by California and Oregon against him. (Just like California) He keeps receipts. He writes down everything in a journal, and takes it with him everywhere.
-He lets his resentment and anger control him. Instead of trying to better his own situation or trying to get along with others, he places the blame for his own failures on everyone else.
-A lot of his resentment and anger is (perhaps misplaced) jealousy. Of California. Of the other cities and regions of California who have (in his mind) everything he never had. Of the other states, who are recognized as such and the honor that brings. Of course he’d never admit this.
-He’s convinced in his own mind that he’s a real state, and has been for decades, and that everyone else is actively conspiring to hide that fact.
-In an attempt to to gain support, he’s gone to the other “misfits” in the nation like Puerto Rico, Hawai’i, and Maryland. Each attempt has backfired spectacularly, as he’s not exactly culturally or racially aware, and ended up saying some offensive shit to them.
-He tries to call both California and Oregon every Thursday to remind them that he’s a state, but they’ve long since blocked him on every form of communication. So he’s gone back to writing letters. They’re long-winded, filled with spelling errors, and list (in great detail) every grievance that Jeff has with both of them. He never gets a response, but he continues to send them.
-He also writes letters to various other California and Oregon cities— nasty, threatening letters if he hates them (San Francisco) or vague attempts to make friends if he likes/admires them (Bakersfield).
-He has a whole ass arsenal of guns. He is absolutely NOT a responsible gun owner. He should probably not be trusted with any type of weapon, not even a kitchen knife.
-He’s a self-proclaimed “survivalist.” He knows how to forage for food and he does eat a lot of wild blackberries and fish he caught himself. However, all the ramen and candy he eats on a regular basis might be hard to find during the apocalypse…
In conclusion, he (not California, as he claims) is his own worst enemy. He lets his legitimate feelings of betrayal and isolation burn out of control and rule his life. He’s lonely and bitter and he’s constantly seeking the kind of validation he never receives.
Also, here’s a playlist for this asshole. Mostly just vibes.
42 notes · View notes
daily-prompts · 1 year ago
Text
Prompt 2185
A group of hardcore environmentalists begin to live in an old grove of trees to protect them from a developer. As they observe the environment more, they find living members of an 'extinct' species.
64 notes · View notes
sunlightbender · 1 year ago
Text
A Somewhat Scathing Barbie Review (from a Barbie lover)
SPOILER WARNING FOR THE BARBIE MOVIE
Okay, okay, PLEASE don’t skin me alive for saying this, but I thought the Barbie movie was mid at best. Don’t get me wrong, it wasn’t terrible, but I’ve been seeing people all over the internet praise it as the greatest cinematic masterpiece of our generation and it’s just... not.
As a positive opening, here’s what I liked:
Set design
Costuming
Acting
(Controversially) The narrator
The music
It’s obviously a gorgeous movie. It’s got so many references to actual Barbie sets and outfits, and as a Barbie fan it’s so much fun to see real people in replicas of Barbie clothes. It’s also super funny, and the music is really enjoyable. With so many positives, it might seem odd that this is titled as a scathing review, but for me, the most important factor in any movie is the story, and well... Barbie’s kind of sucks.
Look, I don’t want to ruin anyone’s perspective on a movie they enjoyed so I’d suggest stopping here if you really liked it. 
The storyline was so heavily lacking. My first biggest qualm: this movie isn’t feminist, it’s sexist, dressed up in feminist frills. Disclaimer: I’m a feminist, hardcore, my family teases me about it all the time. From the very opening of the movie, where they mention that the Barbies see themselves as having made a feminist impact in the world, implying that Barbie as a brand HASN’T done that... eugh. Sasha’s opinion on Barbie is very heavily hinted to be the ‘correct’ one, where Barbie hasn’t positively impacted real women. Gloria’s suggestion at the end, to make an ‘ordinary’ Barbie backs this up - the energy of “We need a realistic Barbie, not the silly, pretty, blonde bimbos of the past”, if you will. 
Let me state this: Barbie is, and has always been, a feminist. Barbie has represented strong women for ages. Barbie, in her pink and glittery glory, has had hundreds of careers, dozens of friends, is loved by all, lives life on her own terms, and has Ken as an accessory. She’s gorgeous and fun and smart and powerful and capable. She has ALWAYS been feminist, and any girl who grew up with Barbies will tell you that playing with them has only helped them imagine “what if I could be-”, in the best possible way. As a woman in STEM, I remember playing with Barbies as a kid, and knowing that I could really do anything, because Barbie could too. 
To build onto this, Gloria’s suggestion that an ‘ordinary’ Barbie be made is ridiculous - I’ve always viewed most Barbies as ‘normal’ people! Are they incredible? Of course! But they’re normal people - that’s the whole POINT of Barbie - she can be anything, she can do anything, she’s incredible because women as a whole can be anything, do anything, and are incredible. To have an ‘ordinary’ Barbie that women can relate to is to imply that ordinary women aren’t capable of being vets, engineers, lawyers, environmentalists, businesswomen, etc. It’s almost as if the movie struggles to differentiate Barbie, the brand, from Barbie, the character. Can any one person have 200+ jobs? No, of course not, but Barbie, the character, has NOT done all of those - it’s just all different fields that Barbie could be capable of - because Barbie, the brand, represents everything that women as a whole can accomplish.
Next, the Kens. Oh god, the Kens. I LOVED the start of the movie. Himbo, accessory Ken is incredible. I love him. I finally understood why straight women loved Ryan Gosling. Then he became a misogynist. Ken’s whole arc is so rushed and muddled. Ken was miserable and bitter even before things started going wrong. In the perfect Barbieland, why should Ken be bitter? It doesn’t make logical sense - before Barbieland was falling apart, you’d think the Kens would be okay with their position in the world. And if not, then is the implication that Barbieland was never perfect? That didn’t come across to me. Let’s be frank, in a perfect Barbieland, there’d either be perfect equality where nobody was upset, or everyone would be 100% okay with the inequality in the world. 
He was so obscenely sexist that the funny movie became genuinely uncomfortable to watch, and for the conclusion to be for Barbie to APOLOGIZE to him despite him stealing her house and brainwashing the country...????? And then the main issue was never even resolved - the hardcore matriarchy continues to exist - just everyone saying “I am Ken” is not going to prevent another Ken uprising, and if Barbieland is perfect, I reiterate once more, KENS DESERVE TO BE TREATED FAIRLY TOO. Also, it seems a little anti-feminist to make the Barbie movie essentially a Ken movie with Barbie crying in the back. The plot was SO Ken-heavy that it didn’t feel like a Barbie movie at all. A really feminist movie would’ve made Ken a background, barely-important character, but he runs the show.
I won’t go on and on, but it’s really uncomfortable. Including the forced almost-kiss. 
Lastly, my big qualm is that Barbie becomes a human. Come on, is humanity not over ourselves already? Why do we make everyone in movies obsessed with us? It’s not enough that aliens should want to live on earth, or that princesses should dream to be common, or that robots wish they were human, Barbie herself has to long to dress in beige and be called Barbara. It was implied that the feminist out here is that Barbie has to escape Barbieland, to become her own person, but Barbie, the idea, has already been feminist! It was important for her to be Barbie, the idea, and there’s no sense to why she should want to be human. Why can’t she stay a perfect stereotypical Barbie, another cog in the perfect, plastic Barbieland machine? What’s wrong with that?
Then, all the dropped plotlines:
Gloria and Sasha’s relationship
The CEO
Ken’s still miserable
Barbie’s impact on the women of the world
Brainwashing apparently is fixed by one cheesy speech?
I think it’s a huge case of target audience. I only realized today, three days after the early screening day when I watched it, that it was not made for Barbie fans like me, who watched every piece of Barbie media, who’ve loved the brand for years. It’s made for people who played with the dolls in the 90s, relegated it as “for kids” and were waiting for a socially acceptable excuse to watch a pink movie again.
Was it a terrible movie? No, I suppose not, but frankly, the movie was muddled, corny, bland, and everything that the movie tried to do has been done better by Barbie’s animated movies and show. If you haven’t watched them, I’d suggest starting with Big City, Big Dreams. It’s a short, easy watch about being competitive without being toxic. The Dreamhouse Adventures series also has a lot of great messages. And then, my personal favorite, the Princess and the Pauper, has an awesome message about women supporting women. Now the men in THAT movie really ARE side characters.
One final comment: Barbie doesn’t give kids eating disorders. Adults telling kids they should look like Barbie gives kids eating disorders. And if you’re blaming Barbie for that, well, please also look at Disney, which pretty exclusively has their fat characters be villains, or toxic teen movies from the early 2000s which called people at size 2s fat. Take it from a woman who’s had multiple eating disorders.
What a rant, huh? And that’s WITHOUT getting into the lack of queer rep in a movie that marketed itself as being very camp - Hari Nef aside (she was wonderful!). If you enjoyed the movie, please don’t let me ruin it. It was definitely a lot of fun, but for me, the story really broke the movie. I’ll give it a 6/10 for enjoyability, and a 4/10 for objective quality.
37 notes · View notes
racefortheironthrone · 11 months ago
Note
Would you say that the message of L'Internationale is softened somewhat when translated from French to English (thinking of Billy Bragg's version specifically)? Most English versions are short and are more generic calls to unite for change, while the original French version is over six minutes long and is more explicitly a call for revolution by the working class, specifically calling out various oppressors and in one verse calls for soldiers to mutiny.
Good question!
youtube
I would certainly agree that the original French lyrics go hard- "Arise, wretched of the earth/Arise, convicts of hunger/Reason thunders in its volcano" is pretty hard to beat. However, it's also a very distinctively 19th century French political statement - it's very anti-clerical ("Il n'est pas de sauveurs suprêmes"), there are pointed references to Napoleon and the "droit au travail" and the concept of "égalité" and the argument of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen that rights and obligations come hand-in-hand, it's a bit more anarchist/syndicalist in its description of the state (which was always a bit embarrassing to the more statist socialist groups), and so forth.
Thus, it has always required translation into not just other languages but other political idioms; notably, the Soviet translation changed the tense of most of the lyrics from the future to the present to emphasize that the Revolution was a reality already achieved rather than in the offing.
Billy Bragg's version is a consciously post-Soviet socialist anthem. It's explicitly anti-racist (say what you like about the original version, but it is very class>race) and intersectional, it's explicitly post-colonial and clearly draws inspiration from the anti-apartheid movement, it's more grounded in a human rights consciousness than historical materialism, it's environmentalist as well as anti-nationalist, and you can see a strong element of non-violence ideology there too. It's still a call for revolution-
"And so begins the final drama In the streets and in the fields We stand unbowed before their armour We defy their guns and shields... For though they offer us concessions Change will not come from above."
-but the dominant imagery is of a protest movement that only engages in violence as a defensive measure "provoked by their aggression."
So I would argue that, as hardcore as the 1887 lyrics are, Bragg's version is better suited to the culture of the British left circa 1990.
16 notes · View notes
deusexlachina · 1 year ago
Text
Like Alpha Centauri but you can romance the mindworms
Setting-wise, Exocolonist is like Alpha Centauri but from the perspective of a random citizen. And you can romance the mindworms.
Cast represents different ideological approaches to a new world, notably including the unethical mad scientist, the friendly capitalist, hardcore environmentalists, and the militarist bastard.
You're escaping a polluted Earth and stranded on a new planet.
You're the aliens, and everything will remind you of that.
The original inhabitants aren't there anymore, but their legacy haunts the planet.
Monsters that seem to be more like robots or an immune system than inhabitants per se.
Although the monsters are trying to destroy you, you can make peace with them through a combination of exploration and science.
People think they can brute force their way out of an interspecies conflict with psychic aliens. They can potentially be right. >:)
Pink fungus :)
You can engineer plagues.
9 notes · View notes
truthnado · 9 months ago
Text
youtube
It's time for another Truthnado!
This one might be a bummer if you're a hardcore environmentalist, because, uh, our first, our first Truthnado, is that only 9 percent of all Plastics get recycled.
91 percent go into landfills or lakes or around small rodents necks and such. Um, and that's because it's not, it's not very profitable to recycle plastics.
Think about it. If you get plastics, you have to sort them by what kind of plastic there are. They are. You have to make sure they're clean. If not, you got to clean it. And then there's lots of multi layered plastics that can't be recycled. And so those are just ditched.
Check out what a recent article published by the Guardian had to say: "They lied. Plastic producers deceive public about recycling. Companies knew for decades recycling was not viable, but promoted it regardless. Plastic producers have known for more than 30 years that recycling is not an economically or technically feasible plastic waste management solution. That has not stopped them from promoting it.", according to the new report.
Man, I mean if you can't trust Big Plastic, who can you trust?
Black plastics, you know, like forks or anything, any plastic that's black can only be black. You know, lighter plastics can be dyed other colors. Not so with that. So some people don't even try. And it's just the idea for a recycling plant is to sell that stuff back to manufacturers, but it's just cheaper for the manufacturers to buy raw plastic products and not the recycled stuff.
Um, And I worked at a place one time. They had recycling bins right next to the trash bins. And at night the cleaning crew just dumped both the bins in together because that was cheaper than taking it going out and recycling.
So that's the sad truth there. Um, but my F5 Truthnado is that There is hope.
There's good things, because recycling is just one of the three headed dragon of reduce, reuse, and recycle. So, recycling plastic might not be great, but you can reduce your plastic intake by buying those crappier bamboo. products if you consider them crappier. Uh, and just reuse and stuff when you can and also other things, uh, have much better hit rate in recycling like paper and metals and things like that.
So recycle kinda?
2 notes · View notes
tobiasdrake · 2 years ago
Text
Trailer for the Kraven movie's out. And. I'm. Not sure who this is for.
Obviously not comic book fans given the extreme liberties taken with the character but that was basically a given. Trying to appeal exclusively to hardcore fans is usually a mistake anyway. Most films shoot for a general audience, and then if the purists like it, that's just a bonus.
But. Like.
Okay. So. It's a shooty guns action movie about taking out criminals with gun violence... with hardcore environmentalist themes.
Those are two completely different sides of the political spectrum.
8 notes · View notes
bwoche · 1 year ago
Text
I used to see posts like this and kinda cringe and scroll past but I've gotten tired of the misinformation and general anti-vegan sentiment on Tumblr. So here's why I disagree with a lot of the points on this post:
1. The use of agave. Personally, I live in Europe, and have not encountered people using agave in place of honey. I HAVE encountered people online who are "plant-based" and tout using different kinds of sugar sources as if they will be healthier for you. They won't, sugar is sugar, no matter where it comes from. Conflating veganism as a diet with veganism as an activism stance is understandable, but being vegan is more than a diet choice.
2. Honey and bees. I could talk all day on this subject but ultimately, no, buying honey is absolutely not good for the bees. For one, honey bees do not search for a new home because of an excess of honey, they do it because the colony has become so large the queen's pheromones can no longer control the entire workforce. This causes some bees to leave and swarm. It's a natural process we assume they've been doing to reproduce for longer than we've been farming them.
In terms of not harvesting the honey and the bees using the cells they use for their young to store more honey, yes this does happen. But only in hives managed by humans. The solution is not to harvest honey, but to stop keeping bees in artificial hives entirely. Honey bees are bred and shipped around the world (lookup Californian almonds and honey bees) specifically to pollinate crops in places that they have no business being in. By keeping bees, you are creating more competition for your country's natural pollinators, who are the insects who REALLY need our help. Having a single pollinator for all agriculture in the world is terrible, both for the industry and the bees. Stop supporting it.
3. Wool. Sheep have been selectively bred over time to produce lots of wool and not naturally shed it so they are required to be sheared. Does shearing hurt sheep? No, if you take your time with it. Do factory wool farms take their time? No, they don't. Also, there is this weird sentiment that vegans are only wearing clothes made of synthetic fibres and ruining the world with microplastics. Most vegans are also environmentalists, they care about the planet. I think you'd be more likely to find a hardcore vegan wearing clothes made of things like hemp than someone who isn't vegan. As well as that, why are vegans held to a higher moral standard than other people when it comes to synthetic fibres? I would put money on the fact that most people have clothes that have some percentage of nylon or polyester in them. No one is wearing clothes made of just cotton or just wool.
4. Eggs. So modern chickens have been selectively bred to overproduce eggs. Their ancestors would lay 12-14 eggs a year, most chickens will lay around 250 eggs a year. This wreaks havoc on their poor bodies that end up calcium and protein deficient - think about the amount they are losing to produce 250 eggs a year. If you keep chickens, I believe the humane thing to do is to let them sit on their eggs for a few days to not disrupt the brood behaviour, and then feed the eggs back to them so that they can recoup the nutrients and minerals they have lost. By harvesting their eggs, you contribute to their pain. You contribute to this system. The best thing to do is to stop breeding chickens. I'd love if we could un-selectively breed them back to what they used to be, like some people have done with dogs like pugs.
Ultimately, veganism is about reducing harm. I truly do understand why people encourage you to support local farmers and not large chain brands (and you definitely should), but as the world is today, buying animal products does contribute to animal suffering and it does contribute to climate change.
Vegans of tumblr, listen up. Harvesting agave in the quantities required so you dont have to eat honey is killing mexican long-nosed bats. They feed off the nectar and pollinate the plants. They need the agave. You want to help the environment? Go back to honey. Your liver and thyroid will thank you, as well. Agave is 90% fructose, which can cause a host of issues. Bye.
251K notes · View notes