Hi

1.5M ratings
277k ratings

See, that’s what the app is perfect for.

Sounds perfect Wahhhh, I don’t wanna
headspace-hotel
zooophagous

Seeing people shoot raptors in other countries is fucking wild to me because we have a whole system of super strict laws governing how you can handle an individual FEATHER off of an eagle, and it doesn't have to even be a dead eagle. One can molt and you can find it on the ground and if you're caught with it the warden will fuck your entire life. What do you mean people are out there shooting them to protect a fucking pheasant. A pheasant??? That thing I have to avoid running over approximately 459 times any time I leave a major highway???

bonnettbee

image

My good friend @prismaticate has asked a very good question here, and while I’m not entirely sure I’m qualified to explain it and would love some input from more qualified sources, my SUPER simplified understanding of why the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 and its numerous modern revisions and addendums have clauses about this included is this:

-It’s basically impossible to tell a feather that’s been picked up off the ground from one that’s been taken from a poached bird

-This used to be a MAJOR problem when bird-feather hats and the like were in high demand back in the day, because several bird species on the edge of extinction kept getting poached in spite of the new laws protecting them since people would just say they “found” any feathers from protected species used in the stuff they were selling, and you couldn’t prove otherwise unless you literally caught them in the act of poaching

-This eventually got SO bad that they had to just make it illegal to have the feathers at all, with certain exceptions made for members of different indigenous groups, or authorized organizations that display them as part of efforts to educate the public about the species they belong to

@zooophagous is this a reasonable rundown? Was there anything I missed/any better sources you might recommend to learn more about this? I know it’s probably far more nuanced than that, but this was kind of the explanation I’d always seen floating around. 😅

zooophagous

That's pretty much the gist of it! Eagles and eagle feathers have more laws on top of that because of their sacred uses in certain indigenous practices, how they relate to legal falconry, and because eagles at one time were highly endangered while at the same time being a national symbol. Where a cop or a game warden may shrug and look the other way if you, say, illegally picked up a chickadee feather from your bird feeder, if they see a real eagle feather they will notice and will be VERY interested in where it came from.

Not long ago here someone was arrested and charged for violating these laws because they tried to sell a plains feather bonnet at a pawn shop, claiming they had "found it while exploring an abandoned house."

The clerk suspected it was real eagle, the warden confirmed it was, and because those feathers are so tightly tracked they were able to locate the family of the previous owners who said the item had been stolen some time ago.

If nobody knows you have it, obviously you can get away with it. But if they see it, or God forbid you try to SELL it, the hammer will fall.

bogleech

Im surprised every time people think it's a crazy sounding law, it is genuinely one of the only things preventing a lot of native birds from extinction or any asshole could kill as many as they want and just say they found them on the ground

the-math-hatter

Wait, poaching wasn’t about the meat, it was about the feathers?

zooophagous

The collapse of bird populations in the USA in the late 1800s thru early 1900s was very much about feathers.

At its peak the feather trade had feathers that were worth more than gold. Commercial hunters would shoot birds out of the sky and sell feathers by the pound, in literal huge crates. Egrets were especially sought after for their beautiful breeding plumage, which was used in fancy hats and accessories. This wrought havoc on the poor birds because they only ever had this plumage during breeding season, so not only were the breeding birds dying, they were leaving next generation's chicks and eggs behind to die of neglect.

Beyond hats, the gentleman's art of fly tying was also a popular art form, more for the sake of showing off one's rare collection of feathers and art than for actual fishing.

There was some meat hunting as well before the banning of commercial hunting, mostly ducks and geese, which also drifted close to extinction as they were taken to be sold in markets.

Even white tailed deer, the ubiquitous animal that's found all over north America in truly ridiculous numbers, came dangerously low. But meat wasn't where the money was when it came to birds. It was feathers.

The Lacey act banned commercial hunting in the United States, putting an end to the constant unregulated commercial killing to fill market stalls with meat (which incidentally is why you don't see venison in most supermarkets in the states. Only farmed deer is legally allowed to be sold.)

And the Migratory Bird Treaty Act made it a crime to not only kill a bird, but to even posess a single feather from one. Most people won't buy a hat that would get them arrested if they wore it outside, so the market for feathers was gutted.

Even though feather hats aren't popular in this day and age, nobody is in a hurry to amend these laws, as birds in general are well loved and popular animals and still very much threatened by other stressors such as pollution and habitat loss.

keroascrazy

So, in the off chance you find one, what....do you do with a feather? Leave it? Report it to local authorities?

zooophagous

You take a picture of your cool find and leave it on the ground

agentsweetdreams
headspace-hotel

It *is* a problem that charismatic species are often focused on for conservation at the expense of less charismatic but important species, but threatened species that are the subject of a lot of public outreach and education are also typically strategically selected.

I suspect that monarch butterflies are an example of this. Milkweed is a highly valuable plant for pollinators and a host plant for like. 400+ insect species. Getting people to plant it to save monarchs is funny because you're essentially finessing people into saving a ton of other insects that they wouldn't ordinarily care about

headspace-hotel

"Save the bees" isn't misguided, it's just the version of the truth you would tell a 5 year old. If a small kid asks about the colors of the rainbow you don't start explaining that visible light has wavelengths of 400-700 nanometers

A lot of people don't even know that there are different types of bees. things like planting native flowers, stopping using insecticides, etc, benefit all bees and all insects generally

headspace-hotel

ALSO

it's actually a GOOD thing to have lots of conservation efforts focusing on "Charismatic megafauna," especially apex predators

Because big animals like tigers need a LOT of space

So creating a preserve to save tigers...saves thousands of other species, because the tigers need miles and miles of habitat to live on, and that habitat needs to be healthy to support the tigers

They're called "umbrella species" and they're a great thing.

becausegoodheroesdeservekidneys

This is exactly why pandas are great for conservation, and whining about them is myopic childish foot-stamping*. An adult panda needs a 2km square range. A viable population needs many of those joined together into a very big protected area. And if you have that, you also have the habitat for hundreds of thousands if not millions of invertebrate species that are never in their wildest dreams going to get that level of protection afforded to them otherwise

*Also pandas don't stop having intrinsic value just because you personally decide they're 'overhyped' or 'don't contribute much to the ecosystem'. Ethically, that is a species that deserves to exist regardless of how 'useful' it is (side note, absolutely FUCK that capitalist bullshit), and also, if humans are why it's going extinct, it's on humans to bring it back. And if they aren't readily breeding in captivity, the question to ask is 'What aren't we providing in their environment that they need?'**, not the whiny temper tantrum of 'But why won't they meet us halfway? They won't help themselves! I am very smart.'

**It's a tall tree to climb. This is emerging research but it looks like a vital part of panda mate selection is watching a male climb a tree to show off his tree climbing genes. We have not been including these in panda enclosures, so the females have been looking at these males sitting around and going 'Tch. Pathetic.'

madwomxxn

Anonymous asked:

are you a terf?

desbianherstory answered:

1. I’m tired of this but here is a post with some links answering related questions. Anyway, I’ve decided to do something unfortunately long-winded in this answer.

2. The term ‘terf’ was created in 2008 by Viv Smythe, a self-described “cis-het” woman who ran a feminist blog. She would post feminist news and events to this blog. In February 2008, she made one such post about a party to celebrate the Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival. A few comments were left on the post decrying Michfest due to the controversy over the festival’s policy on trans inclusion. Smythe replied: “I don’t intend to censor any mention of a feminist group or event simply because their feminisms may not be my feminisms.” A trans woman commented on the post saying that Smythe should have included a disclaimer: “An editors note saying that this festival was problematic. Very simple, and beyond fair, methinks. As in Note: This festival excludes a highly marginalized group of women, and is considered by some as problematic. As much as I loathe the actions of this crowd, they too have a right to be part of the plurality of feminisms… even at the cost of trans women’s lives (as in dead from lack of services) that have been lost to the atmosphere of exclusion promoted by their transphobic ideas.” Smythe updated the post with such a disclaimer.

An organizer for the party also commented on the post saying, “To report, we spoke with MichFest – They do not have a written policy, or any policy for that matter on Trans. Trans womyn are welcome to the party.” Smythe did not find this sufficiently convincing, saying that Lisa Vogel, organizer of the festival, needed to make a clear statement on the issue.

3. In her guardian piece on creating the term ‘terf’, Smythe explains that the February post about the Michfest party led to the creation of the term as “commenters sent me on a rapid learning curve regarding trans-exclusion issues both specific to Michfest and in general.” If you look to the actual post, it generated a very limited response: 7 replies from 4 users and they were all specifically about Michfest.

In any case, on August 17, 2008, half a year after the Michfest post, Smythe wrote a blog post denouncing ‘terfs’ (the first use of the term) in regards to the internet discussions on gender identity going on amongst other feminist bloggers. These discussions had nothing to do with Michfest and were in no way a continuation of the discussion going on in the comment section of the Michfest post six months prior. However, though the denouncing terfs post is linked in the guardian piece, the specifics of these feminist blogging debates are not mentioned at all. Instead, Smythe depicts Michfest as the start and center of the ‘terf’ term creation story. Indeed, she highlights the fact that a few days after the denouncing terfs post, she made another post about ‘terfs’, this time apologizing for having posted about Michfest at all and committing to never promoting a trans-exclusionary event again. She quotes herself as having written on Michfest: “I am aware that this decision is likely to affront some trans-exclusionary radical feminists (TERFs), but it must be said: marginalising trans women at actual risk from regularly documented abuse /violence in favour of protecting hypothetical cis women from purely hypothetical abuse/violence from trans women in women-only safe-spaces strikes me as horribly unethical as well as repellently callous.” In so doing, Smythe emphasizes that ‘terf’ was created to describe and denounce Michfest.

4. In the guardian piece, Smythe compares ‘terfs’ to racists: “Much of the factional divide here comes down to yet another gatekeeping argument about purity in feminism, perennial since the women’s suffrage movement, and this one has uncomfortable echoes of Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s arguments against extending voting rights to black men.”

It is unclear to me how a music festival organized by lesbians can be seen as equivalent to saying black men should not be allowed to vote, or how a music festival somehow results in anyone’s death from lack of services, or how wanting a female-centric music festival can be described as horribly unethical and repellantly callous. Disagreeing with Michfest’s policies does not make any of these statements make any kind of sense. They are more than hyperbolic; they are distortions. However, this has been the narrative consistently chosen and advanced about Michfest. Similarly, Jill Soloway’s Transparent directly compares Michfest to Nazi Germany. Somehow lesbians organizing a female-centric music festival in the woods is equivalent to white supremacy and genocide. Indeed, in an editorial for the The Bilerico Project, Barbra Siperstein somehow managed to compare Michfest to the Westboro Baptist Church (in addition to accusing Michfest organizers of penis envy). 

5. The exact details of what happened at Michfest are not hugely important to this post. There are a number of resources that one can look into: Emi Koyama, TransSisters, Bonnie Morris’ The Disappearing L: The Erasure of Lesbian Spaces, Riki Anne Wilchins’ TRANS/gressive: How Transgender Activists Took on Gay Rights, Feminism, the Media & Congress … and Won! etc. I’ve drawn my own conclusions but what matters here is how did a lesbian music festival become made into such a flashpoint?  And the one and only answer is lesbophobia.

As Lisa Vogel reflected in 2018: “Michigan became a tool that trans activists and gay activists could wield against a larger homophobic mainstream culture. They could say, ‘This is an example of intolerance even in our own community.’ Gay men don’t come from a radical lesbian analysis so they don’t understand why we believe what we believe. […] The press covered Camp Trans wildly, and I would try to respond. [The portrayal] was in a way that is straight up misogyny — by the gay press and the straight press. We cannot forget how defensive everybody is about having womyn’s space. It was kind of perfect for the straight press and the gay press to have someone hammering us about having exclusive space that was supposedly [from] within the community. All kinds of things happen within the gay male community that is exclusive of trans people, that is exclusive of womyn, that is exclusive of, for example anyone except bears. They have complete autonomy of whoever they want to include. It’s frustrating that this [exclusivity] is only held against womyn, I think it was used as a tool by the all-of-a-sudden exploding trans community to be pitted against these “nasty lesbian separatists.” […] The reality is that Michigan already did not have the support of the gay community and we were an embarrassment to the gay organizations, who were all trying to be mainstream. And we were not trying to be mainstream, we are trying to live a different ethic and a different politic. No we won’t fly an HRC flag. No, we won’t do that.”

This also accords with the specific way that lesbian separatism is demonized. Lesbian separatism was literally modelled after the separatist movements created by people of colour. And indeed, many lesbians separatists were women of colour. In lesbian film-maker Pratibha Parmar's A Place of Rage, Angela Davis (also a lesbian!) specifically talks about the importance of separatism to women of colour. Yet lesbian separatism is viewed as some unique evil produced by uniquely evil dyke minds instead of a rational response to lesbophobia within feminist organizing and to misogyny within gay rights activism.

6. I think the history of the term ‘terf’ is important to understanding how it is used today. The woman who created the term has put forward a narrative where it was created in direct response to a lesbian musical festival in the woods; she does not say it was created to address transphobia amongst radical feminists, she does not say it was created to protest housing or employment or healthcare discrimination. She specifically tells us that discussing Michfest’s policies was where it began. Thus, while never naming lesbians, she advances a mean lesbians narrative. She, along with many others, advances a narrative where lesbians having a female-centric music festival is equivalent to denying people of colour their basic civil rights. And that is how it continues to be used today. We see lesbians being attacked as ‘terfs’ for literally being ourselves (being exclusively attracted to other female people) and for things of absolutely zero consequence (for saying that we would like to live with our partner in a house with a garden and a cat, for using the venus symbol, for joking that we don’t need birth control etc) and all of this is absolutely in keeping with how and why the term was created. Lesbian existence, lesbian culture, lesbian history becomes ‘terf’ violence. The mean lesbians are at it again. I have no interest in granting legitimacy to this term when its very origin is tied to demonizing lesbians and believe other lesbians shouldn’t either.

wawaenjoyer
magnetictapedatastorage

"why shouldn't men be allowed in womens chess"

because they're men

"so you're saying women are worse at chess?"

no fuckhead thats a whole different sentence

personalrprants

Dunno what this has to do with trans women, who've shown to have similar-sized prefrontal cortices as cis women, but okay.

wawaenjoyer

why are you so braindead that you read this and thought the problem would be women having a different capacity for logic or intelligence

wawaenjoyer

and this idiots tags are you fr

image

underperformed compared to other men but not compared to real women bc they’ve already experienced the structural physical effects of male puberty and that’s a huge advantage in many physical sports that actual women have no hope of overcoming

flowerlygirls
averagefairy

this is a message for everyone who is 22. if you’re 22 please stop worrying. take a deep breath eat a bagel maybe. everything that feels impossible is going to work itself out. have a great day

fibonassi

do u have a message for 25 year olds

averagefairy

uhhhhh 2 bagels?

thisintermezzo

I'm 32. When I was in my early twenties, I overheard a pair of 50ish year old women talking about the ideal age to stay at permanently. One said, "Everyone says 25. I wouldn't want to be in my twenties forever. Everything is hard and you get upset too easily."

Hearing her say that helped me so much. I thought about it countless times. Every time things felt overwhelming, I remembered what she said. The words of this total stranger, who wasn't even talking directly to me, brought me a lot of comfort, so I hope they can help you, too.

feministclassicist
faeforge

Oh holy shit they found Silphium alive and growing in the wild.

faeforge

Like now that I am awake I need to reiterate how huge this is. It was presumed harvested to extinction by the Romans. It was a favorite flavoring and according to historians one of the best contraceptives ever known. True or not it would be fantastic to study that but it being extinct made that impossible.

This is such a huge deal! I hope they get it figured how to grow it.

the-widow-hazard

image
headspace-hotel
koloocheh

forget about touching grass, i need to touch THE SEA I NEED TO GO INTO THE WATER I NEED TO DIVE INTO THE SEA!!!!!!!!!!!!

koloocheh

I NEED TO GO IN THERE ⬇️⬇️⬇️‼️‼️‼️

image
trickstertime

Lol. Everyone in the notes freaking out like 'I live by the sea, don't jump in, it dangerous'.

Like, guys, guys, listen, you don't understand. They don't mean... They want to be... Listen, ok, I grew up on the sea, I've been through hurricanes on trawlers and gale force 9 storms crewing tallships. I've seen enormous waves absolutely destroy boats. I've been caught in riptides while scuba diving and felt the complete powerlessness of it. The sea will absolutely annihilate you, consume you, never give up your body, and not even notice.

I know the power of the sea better than most, however, I know exactly what they mean. Sometimes you see it churning with unfathomable power and all you want is to just get in the sea and have it absolutely fuckin blast you clean. Like sandblast your fuckin soul. Fuckin powerwash your bones clean. Ya know?

pockysquirrel

Can confirm, getting beat up by the ocean is a religious experience.

ctrmri
ctrmri

How strange it's for males to question whether the world would "progress" without them and to believe that they could survive without women, when they literally only had the time to study and work because a woman carried the rest.

They wouldn't exist without their mother, who provided them with food, their sister, their wife, and all the other women relatives who carried out household chores while the males did nothing.