I waddled onto the beach and stole found a computer to use.

🍁⚕️ 💽

Note: I’m moderating a handful of communities in more of a caretaker role. If you want to take one on, send me a message and I’ll share more info :)

  • 81 Posts
  • 136 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 5th, 2023

help-circle







  • I’m seeing some reports on this post from people who are suspicious about its legitimacy. It looks to be the same format as other Canadian university studies I’ve seen, and the fediverse is the right place to find people for such a study. To me it looks legitimate.

    Maybe I can do a verification from the admin side? If you can send us an email from your institution account to support@lemmy.ca, I can leave a comment confirming that you are indeed from UofT.

    You could also post this in !reddit@lemmy.world





  • Why not wear it on the inside of your wrist?

    Its easier and more discreet to check, you don’t need a complicated new setup, and you won’t have any issues working with your hands.

    I know some people do this already, and flip it around depending on the setting. Inner wrist when walking around, and regular placement when working at a desk.

    Unless I’m getting whooshed here



  • Otter@lemmy.catoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldDon't blink
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    edit-2
    23 days ago

    If anyone is actually worried about this

    The conjunctiva is a thin membrane that covers the inside of the eyelids and the white part of the eye (sclera), making a continuous sealed area that nothing can escape from except the front.

    Also the area behind/around the eye is cushioned by fat and muscle so there’s no room for it. Your eyes don’t bounce around for a reason.

    When the eyelash randomly disappears, I assume your eyelids managed to sweep it into the middle and pick it up when they opened again. If you gently brush your eyelashes, the loose one might fall out. Unfortunately mine are a real pain to get out so they don’t just disappear :')





  • It’s worth a read, but if you don’t have time

    What makes this revival uncomfortable is its timing. Phyllis could not respond. Her family, largely gone. There was no one left to correct the record or explain the circumstances. The image became a blank screen onto which modern viewers projected assumptions about drug use, morality, and personal failure.

    Yet when her life is examined even briefly, those assumptions collapse. There is no evidence that she was a habitual drug user. No record of repeated arrests. No trail of chaos or criminality. Instead, there is a woman born into economic uncertainty, injured young, living through wartime upheaval, briefly targeted by an unjust legal system, and then settling into a quiet, unremarkable life.

    The insult survives because it is easy. The truth requires effort.

    The Reddit comment that circulates alongside Phyllis’s image captures something essential about her case. In 1944, freedom was conditional. It depended on fitting into social expectations, on being legible to authority, on not attracting the wrong kind of attention.

    The same laws that ensnared Phyllis were used disproportionately against the poor, women, and people of colour. Their eventual repeal is often celebrated as progress, but repeal does not undo the damage done to those who lived under them.

    Phyllis Stalnaker did not become a symbol in her lifetime. She did not campaign, protest, or write memoirs. Her story matters precisely because it is small. It reminds us how many lives were quietly constrained by laws that have since been forgotten, and how easily a single photograph can erase complexity.

    Her revival online offers a choice. She can remain a joke, or she can be recognised as what she was: a woman shaped by her time, subjected to its injustices, and deserving of more than a label.