Molasses Diaries

I'm the Mama, the partner, the boss. I love Doctor Who, Sleepy Hollow, Sherlock, Supernatural, Star Trek, Buffy, Orphan Black, etc. HMU if you need anything. I'm good for support and encouragement and I marvel at the talent of all of the cool kids on Tumblr....but stop creating all of this amazingness because I can't keep up! And someday I'll blog about food, autism and David Tennant's lower lip.
anarcho-queer:

Women Prisoners Sterilized To Cut Welfare Cost In California
In California, prison doctors have sterilized at least 148 women, mainly Mexicans, from 2006 to 2010. Why? They don’t want to have to provide welfare funding for any children they may have in the future and to eliminate ‘defectives’ from the gene pool.
The sterilization procedures cost California taxpayers $147,460 between 1997 and 2010. The doctors at the prison argue it is money well-spent.
Dr. James Heinrich, an OB-GYN at Valley State Prison for Women, said, “Over a 10-year period, that isn’t a huge amount of money compared to what you save in welfare paying for these unwanted children – as they procreated more.”
In 1909, California passed the country’s third sterilization law, authorizing reproductive surgeries of patients committed to state institutions for the “feebleminded” and “insane” that were deemed suffering from a “mental disease which may have been inherited and is likely to be transmitted to descendants.” Based on this eugenic logic, 20,000 patients in more than ten institutions were sterilized in California from 1909 to 1979. Worried about charges of “cruel and unusual punishment,” legislators attached significant provisions to sterilization in state prisons. Despite these restrictions, about 600 men received vasectomies at San Quentin in the 1930s when the superintendent flaunted the law.
Moreover, there was a discernible racial bias in the state’s sterilization and eugenics programs. Preliminary research on a subset of 15,000 sterilization orders in institutions (conducted by Stern and Natalie Lira) suggests that Spanish-surnamed patients, predominantly of Mexican origin, were sterilized at rates ranging from 20 to 30 percent from 1922 to 1952, far surpassing their proportion of the general population.
In her recent book, Miroslava Chávez-García shows, through exhaustively researched stories of youth of color who were institutionalized in state reformatories, and sometimes subsequently sterilized, how eugenic racism harmed California’s youngest generation in patterns all too reminiscent of detention and incarceration today. California was the most zealous sterilizer, carrying out one-third of the approximately 60,000 operations performed in the 32 states that passed eugenic sterilization laws from 1907 to 1937.
Although such procedures may seem harsh, they are not illegal. The Supreme Court ruled in 1927 that women can be forcibly sterilized in jail in Buck vs Bell. Writing for the majority, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. said, “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.”
Credit


This is insanity.

anarcho-queer:

Women Prisoners Sterilized To Cut Welfare Cost In California

In California, prison doctors have sterilized at least 148 women, mainly Mexicans, from 2006 to 2010. Why? They don’t want to have to provide welfare funding for any children they may have in the future and to eliminate ‘defectives’ from the gene pool.

The sterilization procedures cost California taxpayers $147,460 between 1997 and 2010. The doctors at the prison argue it is money well-spent.

Dr. James Heinrich, an OB-GYN at Valley State Prison for Women, said, “Over a 10-year period, that isn’t a huge amount of money compared to what you save in welfare paying for these unwanted children – as they procreated more.

In 1909, California passed the country’s third sterilization law, authorizing reproductive surgeries of patients committed to state institutions for the “feebleminded” and “insane” that were deemed suffering from a “mental disease which may have been inherited and is likely to be transmitted to descendants.” Based on this eugenic logic, 20,000 patients in more than ten institutions were sterilized in California from 1909 to 1979. Worried about charges of “cruel and unusual punishment,” legislators attached significant provisions to sterilization in state prisons. Despite these restrictions, about 600 men received vasectomies at San Quentin in the 1930s when the superintendent flaunted the law.

Moreover, there was a discernible racial bias in the state’s sterilization and eugenics programs. Preliminary research on a subset of 15,000 sterilization orders in institutions (conducted by Stern and Natalie Lira) suggests that Spanish-surnamed patients, predominantly of Mexican origin, were sterilized at rates ranging from 20 to 30 percent from 1922 to 1952, far surpassing their proportion of the general population.

In her recent book, Miroslava Chávez-García shows, through exhaustively researched stories of youth of color who were institutionalized in state reformatories, and sometimes subsequently sterilized, how eugenic racism harmed California’s youngest generation in patterns all too reminiscent of detention and incarceration today.

California was the most zealous sterilizer, carrying out one-third of the approximately 60,000 operations performed in the 32 states that passed eugenic sterilization laws from 1907 to 1937.

Although such procedures may seem harsh, they are not illegal. The Supreme Court ruled in 1927 that women can be forcibly sterilized in jail in Buck vs Bell. Writing for the majority, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. said, “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.

Credit

This is insanity.

(via thedrawbridgethatismypants)

herbackrowkings:

lalondes:

>teenage actress’s private nudes get leaked

>teenage actress is reviled as a slut and a whore and a bad role model

>james franco asks a seventeen-year-old girl if he can meet her in a private hotel room

>james franco gets to go on saturday night live and joke about what a silly doofus he is for soliciting sex from a girl literally half his age

DO NOT DARE OVERLOOK THIS POST

(via sluttysoullesssam)

Following spree

enamoredwithsherlolly:

So I’ve noticed my dash has strangely been lacking in fandom stuff lately (how did that even happen), so reblog this post if you blog:

- sherlock
- supernatural
- doctor who
- game of thrones
- marvel

Especially if you ship

- rose x ten
- sherlolly

And I’ll check you out! (follow back would be nice also :) )

sherlockjw:

The way he looks at Molly before he notices Tom.

I heart jelly Sherlock.

sherlockjw:

The way he looks at Molly before he notices Tom.

I heart jelly Sherlock.

captainmurrca:

physics-and-fiction:

The full list of upcoming marvel projects which can be found on IMDb. There is a distinct lack of hulk here. However there are lots that I’m really happy about.

#25 COULD MEAN BUDAPEST

(via morphine-toast-sh)

sherlollymouse:

bassfanimation:

strawberrypatty:

mellopetitone:

equalseleventhirds:

loryisunabletosupinate:

sherlocklector:

loryisunabletosupinate:

Do–

Do they not realize Sherlock is extremely abusive to john too????

Like they justified John being able to kill Sherlock just now????????????

"Mary abused John with her lies"

Sherlock abused John with the drugs he gives him without warning or consent

They are that much in denial and it’s really sad and makes me worry for them in real life. I am scared to think about what they’d accept in the real world because it’s “out of love.”

This is a hue part of why I am against Johnlock happening in the show

It’s not just Sherlock is mean and bad with people, it’s that he actually does not okay abusive behavior

People occasionally cite Mary gaslighting John and she did it because SHERLOCK DID IT FIRST

Like I get shipping but the relationship on the show is so not okay and it’s painted as romantic or funny and a lot of their interactions are really horrible

i am REALLY UNCOMFORTABLE with what people call ‘abuse’ from mary. because failing to tell someone about all the horrible dangerous traumatizing shit from your past isn’t abuse. no one should feel entitled to knowing everything about you; that’s something you share with someone as you grow to trust them, not a requirement for a relationship.

and like, we’re actually shown that john hasn’t told mary all about his past, because we know that she didn’t read the blog before sherlock came back because HE told HER it was ‘all ancient history’ and didn’t want her to read it. but mary’s ancient history, that was something she just owed to john, right?

and lmao at ‘she’s abusing john with a baby that’s not his’ haha wow so basically your headcanon is so definitely canon that it ABSOLUTELY DEFINES mary’s canon characterization. wow.

(also ppl keep saying she gaslighted john, and like… gaslighting is when someone points out you did something and you tell them they’re imagining it??? and i have never seen her do that to john???? lying is not the same as gaslighting okay, gaslighting is a very specific type of lying, not all lies are gaslighting)

My abuser said he loved me multiple times a day, said all kinds of things. That abuse was 100% not okay.

Whether someone possibly loves someone else does not make that abuse ok at all.

Sherlock may love John but he’s been terrible to him. John may love Sherlock but he’s been terrible to him. I think it’s important that fandom recognize harmful behaviors. Knowing what red flags look like and being able to recognize them and act on that while they can could be really useful and important.

Wow. Just wow.

I can’t even believe this initial post.

I had NO IDEA the Watson baby was definitely not John’s. This is a headcanon that exists for NO reason other than to demonize Mary.

Mary’s lies weren’t abusive. Mary didn’t lie about who she is. She lied about who she had been. She showed John exactly who she was for four years before they met.

Sherlock getting a pass on drugging John because he “loves John” is classic excuses for abuse. That’s some Fifty Shades of Bullshit.

MARY HAS ABUSED JOHN WITH A BABY? I AM DONE WOW.

#That’s some Fifty Shades of Bullshit. ty!!!

Wait, what? When did we start questioning the paternity of the Watson’s baby? I’m so confused..

Lingonberry jam and gjetost cheese on gluten-free whole-grain toast, if you must know.