Autistic/adhd culture is sticking up for people with Down syndrome because if we don’t stick up for each other, who will?
Autistic/adhd culture is sticking up for people with learning disabilities, dyspraxia, developmental delays like Down syndrome, and other neurodevelopmental disabilities because we are stronger together
(i hope you dont mind me adding this on)
I don’t, it’s a very good addition!
An injury to one is an injury to all.
and because we know having a differently structured brain doesn’t stop you from being awesome, so obviously we should be friends
you know what i don’t see enough of? circus kid dick grayson critiquing the joker because he’s a bad clown. not like, bad, and also a clown. but bad at being a clown. i want to see dick grayson taking the existence of this horrible clown very personally as a matter of professional pride. he has known clowns, and you, sir, are no clown. the joker is an insult to the legacy of emmett kelly and this shall not stand.
Joker: I’m gonna end you.
Dick: Bitch you can’t even make a balloon animal shut the fuck up.
joker: heehee it’s funny because murder!
dick: you’re not a clown, you’re just a manson fan who got dragged face-first through the wardrobe department for ‘willy wonka’, and all the ways you’re funny are unintentional
“Throughout the day, partners would make requests for connection, what Gottman calls “bids.” For example, say that the husband is a bird enthusiast and notices a goldfinch fly across the yard. He might say to his wife, “Look at that beautiful bird outside!” He’s not just commenting on the bird here: he’s requesting a response from his wife—a sign of interest or support—hoping they’ll connect, however momentarily, over the bird.
The wife now has a choice. She can respond by either “turning toward” or “turning away” from her husband, as Gottman puts it. Though the bird-bid might seem minor and silly, it can actually reveal a lot about the health of the relationship. The husband thought the bird was important enough to bring it up in conversation and the question is whether his wife recognizes and respects that.
People who turned toward their partners in the study responded by engaging the bidder, showing interest and support in the bid. Those who didn’t—those who turned away—would not respond or respond minimally and continue doing whatever they were doing, like watching TV or reading the paper. Sometimes they would respond with overt hostility, saying something like, “Stop interrupting me, I’m reading.”
These bidding interactions had profound effects on marital well-being. Couples who had divorced after a six-year follow up had “turn-toward bids” 33 percent of the time. Only three in ten of their bids for emotional connection were met with intimacy. The couples who were still together after six years had “turn-toward bids” 87 percent of the time. Nine times out of ten, they were meeting their partner’s emotional needs.”
…
“Kindness… glues couples together. Research independent from theirs has shown that kindness (along with emotional stability) is the most important predictor of satisfaction and stability in a marriage. Kindness makes each partner feel cared for, understood, and validated—feel loved. “My bounty is as boundless as the sea,” says Shakespeare’s Juliet. “My love as deep; the more I give to thee, / The more I have, for both are infinite.” That’s how kindness works too: there’s a great deal of evidence showing the more someone receives or witnesses kindness, the more they will be kind themselves, which leads to upward spirals of love and generosity in a relationship.
There are two ways to think about kindness. You can think about it as a fixed trait: either you have it or you don’t. Or you could think of kindness as a muscle. In some people, that muscle is naturally stronger than in others, but it can grow stronger in everyone with exercise. Masters tend to think about kindness as a muscle. They know that they have to exercise it to keep it in shape. They know, in other words, that a good relationship requires sustained hard work.
“If your partner expresses a need,” explained Julie Gottman, “and you are tired, stressed, or distracted, then the generous spirit comes in when a partner makes a bid, and you still turn toward your partner.”
Captioned because even I’m having trouble reading this:
[A screenshot from snapchat of a document that is cut off on the extreme edges, erasing the first and last two or three letters from each line. Doing my best to correctly transcribe]
Breach of terms of service: culturehustle.com Illegal acquisition on behalf of Anish Kapoor of the World’s Pinkest Pink
Dear Sirs,
I am aware that you represent Mr. Anish Kapoor, and I write today not to dob him in so that you can tell him off but rather to try and resolve this matter. Unlike Kapoor I am not one to ‘point the finger’ however on this occasion it has become important to do so.
I hold your gallery in the highest esteem, I am a fan of several of your artists, but on this occasion you have been extremely naughty. You have been part of a conspiracy to obtain my PINK and provide Mr. Kapoor with it.
We have now finished fully researching this situation and it has come to your attention that you have been part of a conspiracy to obtain my PINK and provide Mr. Kapoor with it enabling him to exploit the substance against my wishes. Further, this juvenile behavior made much of the wider artistic community sad thanks to his extremely petty and childish post on Instagram.
The terms of service on my site CultureHustle.com are incredibly clear: Quote: By adding this product to your cart you agree that you are not Anish Kapoor, you are in no way affiliated with Anish Kapoor, you are not purchasing this item on behalf of Anish Kapoor or an associate of Anish Kapoor. To the best of your knowledge, information and belief this product will not make its way into that hands of Anish Kapoor.
In direct violation to the above, on 10th of December 2016 a person by the name of Mr [Blanked out] placed an order via the culturehustle.com website, for one jar of PINK at 5:36 am. This order was placed on behalf of your gallery and was delivered to the Lisson Gallery in London at 11:38 am on the 13th of December. Shortly after which your gallery provided Mr. Kapoor with the substance and on the 23rd of December 2016 Mr. Kapoor posted a photograph on Instagram showing he was indeed in possession of the substance, he also included the caption ‘Up Yours’. The comments on this post clearly demonstrate the negative impact such a gesture has had upon a wide community. He needs to say sorry for hurting everyone’s feelings.
I remind you, hoarding colours and stealing other people’s colours without asking nicely isn’t big -rd it’s simply bad.
I said I think it would be best to resolve this matter amicably without this silly business escalating any further. However, if we are unable to resolve this in a timely and grown up way I am fully prepared to take further action which will no doubt become stressful and expensive.
Therefore I would appreciate it if: 1. Your gallery would say sorry for giving my pink to Mr. Kapoor. 2. Mr. Kapoor would give me my pink back. I don’t want him to have it. 3. He will write 100 times, ‘I will be nice, I will share my colours’ and he will post the same to his Instagram.
Failing the above, an agreeable settlement would also be: 1. The reimbursement of $3.99 (the cost of PINK minus shipping) 2. And Mr. Kapoor to void his exclusive agreement to the use of Vanta Black in art.
If you were to settle as above I will be more than happy to share all my colours with him, so he doesn’t feel left out and can join in with the rest of us.
I look forward to resolving this matter.
Yours,
Stuart Semple
Thank you for captioning this! I’d seen it before but never been able to read it.
Dove's Tumblr Archive 