No, said Aziraphale, it's ineffable.

viralthings

Before and after I sign good boy to my deaf dog

dxnversalex

elodieunderglass

1. what a good boy

2. how nice to see a lethal white with a good life

punk-de-l-escalier

Wait, I thought that colour combination was only lethal in horses.
Like, your white/pinkskinned/blue-eyed cat or dog’ll probably be or go deaf, but they’ll live…but horses, man, kiss that slimy foal while it’s still fresh, because it’s not long for this world.
Am I missing something? Can haz nibbet of education?

elodieunderglass

Homozygous merles are frequently called “lethal whites" by laypeople, and it’s a term that most people will recognize, but the only deadly thing about homozygous merle dogs is that they’re usually culled at birth. They frequently have disabilities that people can’t handle in pet dogs, such as being deaf, blind or both. The condition is preventable - it occurs when people breed blue merles to blue merles in the hopes of generating the desirable, marketable blue merle pups. It’s quite sad, actually, that the pressures of the market leads to the generation of disabled dogs that are then culled at birth. It’s quite possible for these dogs to be acceptable pets with healthy lives, since deafness/blindness aren’t necessarily barriers to being good companion animals.

I used the term “lethal white” since people have heard of it in conjunction with Australian Shepherds and “homozygous merle” isn’t something people have heard of, but it isn’t the same lethal white condition as in horses, which is called Lethal White Overo.

Disclaimers:

1. I’m not a dog person, I’m a genetics person, and the Discourse surrounding “LETHAL WHITE IS A PROBLEMATIC TERM” tires me out.

2. In recent months, I have been coming down more on the side of “making people understand what I’m talking about” than “being 100% scientifically accurate,” because if science communication or discussion isn’t accessible/doesn’t spur curiosity, then what is the fucking point of doing any of it?? when the majority of our audience don’t have a basic scientific education, is there any point in being the science equivalent of a Reddit Grammar Nazi, when that kind of behavior just makes the audience tune you out even further? but I might change my mind on that again later.

subspacecommunication

klatukattdreams replied to your post “Okay I was going to reblog the old art but it’s way too bad. Like……”

What’s “a skant”?

It’s the skirt uniform! In TNG, especially season 1 though I think some may have appeared in season 2, they designed a skirt uniform for amab people because in a utopian future there shouldn’t actually be any one item of clothing defined by sex or gender. (For some reason it’s called a “skant” and I can’t remember why.)

The actual issue is probably a little bit more complex than that, TNG was looking at it in terms of strict male/female (and atheist) binary. Outside of that binary, and/or plus religion or culturally significant clothing, it probably is a little bit more difficult to navigate.

The core idea though: 100% agree with. I appreciated seeing the men walking around in the skirt uniforms as a kid, and I appreciate it now. It was great to see characters that didn’t conform to current gender standards in the show. It was great to see people like me reflected, if only very briefly. I’m not the only one to be saddened that this was basically never seen again post season 2 TNG. Eventually all characters took to wearing trousers, but I’d argue this is false equality in clothing - historically it’s become “okay” for women to “dress as men”, but not the other way round. An equal Trek should always include the skant too, imho, or it just plays into current hang-ups and barriers to sex and gender.

There are several amab/coded-masculine/etc characters in the shows who I think should and would be characters pleased to wear the skant uniform.

Bashir is definitely one of them.