ButterflyMasking

Genderflux agender/demigirl | Asexual Demi-pan-romantic | She/Her I need to update this blog lol

[kaijusaur]

manifesting a mia fey prequel game with sad wet phoenix wright as your intern

[2nddoughnut]

the best family in all of fiction i fear

[butterflymasking]

Cuteness overload

[theconcealedweapon]

[the-arthropod-queen]

I’m not sure what this proves. It’s not like walls with photorealistic pictures of roads on them are things that human drivers regularly meet and overcome

[airmetsierra]

It shows that camera-based systems can be prone to optical illusions that lidar-based systems (which detect objects and their distances directly instead of trying to interpret an image) wouldn't be fooled by.

There was a news story from several years back where a semi truck was making a left turn across a mostly empty highway and a Tesla on autopilot plowed directly into the trailer at full speed, decapitating the driver, because the cameras were fooled in much the same way as the test above by the white trailer blending in with a cloud on the horizon.

[ministarfruit]

phoenix wright: ace attorney

[the-tired-tenor]

So uh….some dude apparently recreated Adobe Photoshop feature-for-feature, for FREE, and it runs in your browser.

Anyway, fuck Adobe, and enjoy!

[adv3nturelust]

Give credit to the 30-year-old who worked on this for free and offers this service for free!

[celestial-fang]

Holy shit

[inkskinned]

when i was younger and stupid and in the (glass) closet i was dating the son of a pharmacologist. this man had made millions developing medications. he was fond of me and privately told me i was too funny and smart to be dating boys.

he also said that it was incredibly unlikely that sexism will ever be resolved in the medical field. that the majority of medications i will ever take - even some of which are "for women" - will not be clinically tested on my body.

the problem, he said, was in getting any human clinical trial approved. to test on a body with a uterus - any body, even elderly patients or those who have been sterilized - was often nigh-impossible, because the concern was that the test patient may, at any point, become pregnant. once/if the patient became pregnant, the study would not be about "the effects of New Medication on the body." instead, the trial would fail - the results would be "the effects of New Medication on a developing fetus/pregnant patient."

it was massively easier, he said, to just test without accounting for a uterus. that's how he phrased it - accounting for a uterus.

at the time, i remember him talking about the ethical implications of testing on a developing fetus; how such testing could theoretically bankrupt a company if a lawsuit was filed. he talked about informed consent and about how long it took for any legislation to be passed about this - that in 1993; the year i was born, it finally became illegal to outright exclude women and minorities from clinical trials.

i remember him shrugging. "that's not to say it doesn't happen," he said. my ears were ringing.

i was thinking about how every time i have been rushed to the ER, the first thing they have asked me is if i am pregnant. when i broke my wrist at 16 years old - despite never having had sex - they made me wait three hours for the test to come back negative before they gave me pain meds. the possibility of a child haunts my health.

how many people have died on the table because they were waiting for the pregnancy test before treatment. how many people have died on the table because they were pregnant, and the only thing we care about is the fetus.

it is hard to explain to other people, but it feels like some kind of strange ghost. our entire lives, we are supposed to "save" our bodies for our future partners. but really we are just saving the body for the future child, aren't we? that hovering future-almost that cartwheels around in a miasma. you can't get your tubes tied, what if you change your mind? think of the child you must have, eventually.

who cares about you and your actual safety. think about what you could be carrying.

[dd-the-man-without-fear]

The Chief Graphic Designer:

[depsidase]

[dandelionsresilience]

Just gonna drop these here as a starting point :)

How to identify, and then deal with, your emotions

Emotional regulation skills

Conflict resolution skills

Creating and enforcing boundaries

Dialectical Behavioural Therapy skills

Emotional intelligence ideals to aim for

Axes of self-care/wellbeing

Self-care self-evaluation (find out where you’re starting)

How to make a self-care checklist

How to start a self-care habit

Reparenting resources

Crash Course Psychology

KhanAcademy: Understanding the Self and Society (some units more relevant than others)

Emotional education activities for children and teens

Social-Emotional Learning activities for kids (information can be adapted for adults)

[butterflymasking]

Pink did everything she could to stop the invasion before she resorted to starting the rebellion (Pearl says so herself, being present for countless meetings between Pink and the other Diamonds where she begs them to end it, in the episode "Now We're Only Falling Apart")

And from the very start (as seen in the episode "Jungle Moon") the ONLY reason Pink wanted a colony was to gain respect from the other diamonds by copying them ("I want to command a drop ship!" "I want a colony!" "It's not fair! I want...my own army!  I want my own planet! I'm just as important as you!").

In that episode she clearly didn't know what Yellow Diamond was doing (she literally starts the conversation by asking what Yellow is doing, and tries to participate), nor what it meant. All she knew was that Yellow was respected for doing something important and Pink wanted to be respected by doing the important thing too--all the while Yellow kept scolding and dismissing her.

Pink Diamond was neglected and abused by the other diamonds (Pink was constantly locked alone in the tower on homeworld for ages at a time, for every little thing, even as harmless as what Steven did by wanting to dance at her own ball, as seen in the episode "Escapism"), and was convinced that the only way to get them to treat her well was to do what they were doing

 And when they finally gave her Earth, she was so desperate to be respected by them that she left her playmate Spinel behind to prove that she was 'mature' now and done playing games (you see how Yellow was always watching her to make sure she wasn't goofing off in the episode "Together Alone" so you can understand why Pink wouldn't want to goof off with Spinel anymore). 

(Abandoning Spinel is 2/3 bad things that is valid to hate Pink for, but you have to understand that being left behind was normal for the other diamonds to do to Pink, which was also referenced in the lyrics to the song "Familiar:" "they love her but they're leaving her behind."  And as Rebecca Sugar said herself, Rose/Pink didn't think Spinel valued her enough to actually wait there for her)

(The 3/3 valid reason to hate Pink is how she handled Bismuth, especially since she didn't free Bismuth after the war was over.  There's no defense for keeping her bubbled after the war, I'll give you that)

Pink was bored out of her mind with overseeing the colony because she never actually wanted the colony in the first place, she only wanted to prove herself to the other diamonds.

And when Pink did see the consequences of her colony hurting Earth, she pleaded with Blue Diamond to end the invasion (episode "Can't Go Back" direct quote from Blue scolding her, "But this is what you wanted. You begged us for a colony of your own, and now all you want to do is be rid of it."). Blue didn't even let Pink speak. She shut Pink down just like she and the other diamonds ALWAYS had and kept the colony going.

And we all saw how White Diamond doesn't let anyone get a word in either (in the episode "Legs from Here to Homeworld"). And how White had refused to give her a colony just like the others (explained in the Steven Universe Future episode "Volleyball").

(Cracking Pink Pearl's face was 1/3 valid reasons not to like Pink, but Pink Pearl says herself in that same episode that it was accident caused by Pink Diamond shouting about White, and afterward Pink stopped throwing tantrums to prevent from harming anyone else)

That's why Pink had to become Rose and start the rebellion: so the other diamonds would actually be forced to hear what she had to say, even if it wasn't herself saying it (again said in the episode "Now We're Only Falling Apart").

Y'all are literally hating on an abuse victim standing up for herself (AND others who were abused by the same system, like the "off color" gems and the Crystal Gems, who ALL would have been shattered just for either existing, or for loving each other/fusing as shown in the episode "Together Alone", or for wanting to do things that they weren't assigned to do, as seen in the episode "Your Mother and Mine").

The war wasn't just "Pink fought herself." The war was finally standing up to a system that abused, killed, and oppressed its own constituents, and that also killed life on countless other planets.

Y'all also want to blame Pink for the gems on Earth being corrupted because of the war, but 1) the other three diamonds were the ones that corrupted them (their hands depicted emitting the corruption blast seen in the episode "Your Mother and Mine") including Homeworld gems who didn't evacuate in time (such as Centipeetle, can't remember her name, in the episode "Monster Reunion"), and 2) the other three diamonds were the ones who made the Cluster (as Peridot says in the episode "When it Rains") by gathering the shards of the shattered gems to use in horrifying fusion experiments to destroy Earth even after they lost the war (as stated in episode "Keeping it Together" also in which Garnet plainly says Rose couldn't have known about it).

Pink/Rose is NOT a bad person and I will die on this hill.

Before you say she's a bad mother, I pointed out how senseless that accusation is in my other post:

https://www.tumblr.com/butterflymasking/753213325116145664/apparently-steven-universe-has-been-getting?source=share

[butterflymasking]

We live in a country where the government throws endless trash into our water source, and everyone tells everyone else "just work harder to pick the trash out and you'll have clean water!" And if one person isn't able to pull up very much trash on their own, everyone else says "Why should I have to pick up more trash just because they can't?" even though we're all drinking from the same trash-filled water.

Even if the whole country managed to clean the water, the government will just continue to throw more trash in it until it's full of trash again.

The solution isn't to "keep working harder and harder to pick the trash up so you'll have clean water!"

The solution is to stop the government from dumping trash in the water.

[butterflymasking]

The biggest issue I have with the direction Zelda as a franchise is currently going in *is the lack of permanent items as the cost of an open world.*  One could argue that that started with A Link Between Worlds back in 2013, but that game was a handheld and wasn't nearly as popular as BotW became, and you had the option to permanently buy them, and different items were required to enter different dungeons so the items weren't optional/useless.

    But removing permanent items for the sake of an open world is a huge mistake IMO because BotW and TotK and even EoW could have been so much better if you could use, say, a Hookshot to climb mountains when it's raining, or use the Beetle to scope out shrines/dangerous areas, or have a Whip/Grappling Hook to swing from enemies/objects you use Stasis/Recall on!

   Just keep BotW and TotK exactly the same but add permanent items in the mix, and they'd be 100000% better IMO.  The most common complaint I've seen about BotW/TotK (even from people who say they're the best games ever) is how much the weapons break lol.  Adding permanent items–even with limited usages like in ALbW, with the little meter that runs out if you spam them (which is much like how BotW/TotK handled the Master Sword, now that I think about it)–would have fixed that!

  I love Open World Zelda as much as the next guy, but when you sacrifice the story and staple Zelda items in order to achieve that, that's when the series starts to blend in with every other open world game out there.  One or two games without them is fine, but when every new Zelda game henceforth is also open world without items or a story that wasn't an afterthought, then the franchise gets stale =\ 

  Just like how BotW was new and different from Skyward Sword, and just like how Zelda 2 was new and different from Zelda 1, and just like how MM was new and different from OoT--I want the next Zelda games to be new and different from BotW/TotK.

[butterflymasking]

Has this been done? Just randomly came to me lol.

[depsidase]

[dandelionsresilience]

Just gonna drop these here as a starting point :)

How to identify, and then deal with, your emotions

Emotional regulation skills

Conflict resolution skills

Creating and enforcing boundaries

Dialectical Behavioural Therapy skills

Emotional intelligence ideals to aim for

Axes of self-care/wellbeing

Self-care self-evaluation (find out where you’re starting)

How to make a self-care checklist

How to start a self-care habit

Reparenting resources

Crash Course Psychology

KhanAcademy: Understanding the Self and Society (some units more relevant than others)

Emotional education activities for children and teens

Social-Emotional Learning activities for kids (information can be adapted for adults)

[malakaiblackscloset]

[about-faces]

Holy shit at first glance I thought that top image was satire. Like, how Fox News would react to Superman if he was real. But no, no, of course our stupid, awful reality out-Onions the Onion yet again.

Anyway, one more:

[butterflymasking]

As an American I'm ashamed of what greed and selfishness has turned this country into. When you vote for passing a bill that will lead to your fellow Americans dying--all because you don't like the idea of taxes helping your fellow Americans--then I ask you what you want your taxes to be spent on

Because right now, they're being used to fund the military to bomb other countries, and they're being used to lock human beings with no criminal records--from children to seniors--in cages without a chance to prove they're legal citizens.

But you'd rather have that than let disabled American citizens have basic healthcare. You'd rather have that than let American citizens who work for an unlivable wage have food assistance.

Why? Because you're tired of working for an unlivable wage due to your taxes taking from that wage.

And you're mad that "illegal immigrants are stealing American jobs" why? Because employers can pay illegal immigrants BELOW minimum wage.

Your issues aren't caused by your fellow Americans. Your issues are caused by unlivable wages, because the people in charge don't want to pay workers. They don't want to pay YOU.

They want to increase their profits indefinitely--which is inflation--and your paycheck is in the way of that.

And then to cover that up, the people in charge blame your lack of pay and the high tax rates on your fellow Americans, dividing us against each other.

"United we stand, divided we fall."

Happy 4th of July, everyone.

[butterflymasking]

I was arguing with strangers over my dislike of how modern Zelda games let you solve 'puzzles' any way you want.

For the sake of analogy, let's replace the game's puzzles with real life jigsaw puzzles. In order to complete one, we have to match the pieces by shape and color to make the picture on the box, and the puzzle is solved. The solution to games' puzzles is the equivalent to the picture on the box of the jigsaw puzzle.

In the old Zelda games, the puzzles have the same solution, but just like in real life with jigsaw puzzles, everyone uses different logic as to how we solve that puzzle. Some of us match colors first; others match shapes first; some just try fitting every piece together until they find the right match--until all the pieces are put together to get the same picture completed.

The satisfaction comes from seeing that completed picture match the one on the box, and knowing that you earned that by fitting ALL of the pieces in correctly with your own logical methods.

In the newer games, it feels like there isn't a picture on the box for us to match the puzzle to, yet we still have all of the pieces to the puzzle.

So we can still get creative with how we match the pieces, sure. BUT if we reach a solution that doesn't require all of the pieces the way the devs intended, then we end up with pieces leftover, and the picture is incomplete. An incomplete picture is not satisfying.

And if you have your instinctive way of matching the pieces, i.e. by color, then you can continue to solve every single puzzle in newer games with that single method. FOR ALL OF THEM. And if matching by color doesn't work, then you can simply move on to trying the next method of matching them, i.e. by shape. The same 2-3 methods of matching them will ALWAYS work, without the need for fitting every piece together or completing the picture.

So either way, you don't have to fit the pieces together at all to reach the solution. You don't have to actually solve the puzzle at all, so even though the game acts like you did solve it by letting you progress, we as the player do not get to see the intended picture, so it's not satisfying.

Even if we do see the intended picture, the fact that we don't need to actually fit ALL of the pieces together in our own ways to make that picture makes it less satisfying; you can just do the bare minimum and you're rewarded for it the same way.

I repeat: an incomplete picture is not satisfying.

[butterflymasking]

Written English should be an art form, and I'm so mad that it's not.

I write as a hobbyist and I use the words that I think fit what I'm trying to convey the most, based on my knowledge of root words and suffixes, etc. However, I've accidentally been using fake words that I thought were real.

Examples:

"Which building is it?" she asked.

"The building thats roof is blue," he replied.

In this case, 'thats' SHOULD be 'whose.' But in my mind, 'whose' implies that whatever the subject is belongs to a living thing. Like, 'the rabbit whose ears are floppy,' or 'the person whose bag was forgotten.'

In my mind, 'thats' makes just as much sense as 'its' for inanimate objects, and 'its' IS a real word. For example, "the building lost its structure during the hurricane."

We aren't going to say "the building lost their structure during the hurricane," because 'their' implies that the building is alive. In my mind, using 'whose' for an inanimate object is just as weird as using 'their' for it.

So why isn't 'thats' a word?