@theartofmadeline
No title available
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
NASA
Love Begins
izzy's playlists!
⁂
Jules of Nature
Aqua Utopia｜海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
will byers stan first human second
Game of Thrones Daily
Stranger Things
h
No title available
tumblr dot com
PR's Tumblrdome
Claire Keane
trying on a metaphor
tannertan36
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from Sri Lanka
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
@confusedarchaeolgist
I finally watched The Sound of Music and like I get it now, I get it.
It’s a beautiful two hour love story of a strict man finally opening his heart again and then a fifty minute public service announcement to hate the nazis. Brilliant.
You’re not wrong there…
Reblogging this version cuz those two gifs show the sexiest duality a man can have.
2 things a man should do
Look at me like he can’t believe I exist
Hate nazis
99% of queer discourse stops right before they define the true difference between bisexual and pansexual!
FOR THE LAST FUCKING TIME
BISEXUALS GROW FROM THE GROUND
PANSEXUALS GROW FROM THE CEILING
girl help they are making me do my job at work
His Dark Materials
(Spoilers)
Okay, I know I’m showing up to this party three years after the show ended… but can someone please explain to me why it ended like that? I mean, I’m not gonna lie, it was actually kind of heartbreaking… but seriously… why? From what they said, I gathered that demons couldn’t survive in the world Will was from… but he still ended up having one?
I haven’t read the books, so I have no idea how different the story is there… but I’m kind of in shock. After everything that happened, after all the deaths… it just ends like that, “for the greater good”? Nooo… I wanted a damn cheesy ending where they actually find a way to be together again — and not like, as atoms after death, but way before that…
Like, I did like the show (even though it took me a while to get into it), but I wouldn’t watch it again. Not just because it doesn’t really give much payoff for the characters, but also because it just didn’t feel like the kind of story you actually enjoy. In the sense that it's a story that gives you everything you expect. Well, it didn't give me that.
I’m honestly feeling kind of torn about it now — and that’s coming from someone who didn’t even care all that much for most of the time.
I'm late to the party on this post, so hope you don't mind me adding to it. But, SPOILERS within the story, I guess it ends like that because there's no way that a person can live a long, whole, healthy life in another world, which is why lord asriels plan will always fail.
But also, and I'm kinda borrowing from other posts I've seen. But I think that the point of the story is that love CAN save the world, but that doesn't mean it can save everything or that it will make everything okay. But also there's a message of hope that we can build more love even when everything has been taken away from us, and maybe that will save the world again.
Idk man, I just think the only way to heal from the book that broke my 13 year old heart is to keep rereading it every year for nearly 20 years to try and find some hope and something to fix my heart
twenty years across the sea
what if i sob
My dad raises grass-fed beef cattle and I help him sell it, mainly by maintaining an online presence. For a while, I kept having the most ridiculous conversations with people who I assume were marketing students. I didn't want to be rude so I'd try to let them down gently but this one guy just kept insisting that with his magical marketing skills he could grow our business.
What he could not seem to comprehend is that we could not grow our business, at least not without significant time and monetary investment. Cows take two years from pregnancy to the size that you can sell. If we buy adult cows, our margins become razor thin or even negative. Even if we somehow could acquire some cows, our barn and hay fields are already near maximum capacity. Renting another field would be relatively easy, building a bigger barn not so much.
Cows are living animals, they aren't widgets that can be produced infinitely. Besides that, many businesses inherently cannot grow, because if they do they'll become something else. The delicious bakery down the street cannot produce much more than they do, if they began mass marketing and production they'd eventually be selling the equivalent of Twinkies. We grow grass-fed, organic beef, if we expanded how long would that last? Eventually we'd become the very factor farms that we hate. Some things can only ever be made on a small scale and they are usually the best things.
But also, what are they teaching them at marketing school and how is it so disconnected from reality?
People kept trying to do this to my petcare business. “Let us build you a website! Let us buy you some ads! Let us print you flyers and cards!” I have exactly as much business as I can handle, and I’m happy with that. “But if you expand you could hire other people to do the work and pay them less, and raise your prices and eventually you can work from home!! Let us help you!” I’m doing this because I like playing fetch for a living, I like being outside moving around all day every day, I like spending time with each animal separately, I like being trusted by my clients with the keys and codes of their homes, it makes me feel proud. None of what you’re offering me is what I want. I don’t want a dozen miserable contractors who I pay 40% of each visit, I don’t want to try and wrangle and hire and vet people to do the part of my job that I like for me. That sounds bad. That’s a bad idea. And they looked at me like I was speaking an alien language. “But… website!! SEO! Ad buys! Targeted coverage! Constant growth!!” I don’t want any of that in my life it sounds fucking awful
One of the cruelties of capitalism is that if you want to do work you’re good at and love, a lot of the time your only option is to enter into some kind of business, and as soon as you do that, all the structural incentives of the system start trying to pull you away from the parts that you’re there for (i.e. the things that make life worth living) and towards various kinds of exploitation. Anyway, this also applies to writing and selling novels.
I don't know exactly how to articulate this but... if you repeatedly show historical fiction women rejecting traditionally female skills/duties and doing swords instead, because swords is obviously the Most Important Thing, you are kind of implying that all the work that has been traditionally done by female hands for millennia was useless all along and not, you know, keeping civilization going. Because it's usually rejected not as a personal preference but as This Is The Important Stuff (male work) and That is The Dumb Useless Stuff (women's work) and that kind of bothers me. The message was supposed to be Vital But Underpaid and Underappreciated, not women's work is insignificant so let's all go do swords.
Yuzu Kato aka かとう ゆず aka Kato Yuzu (Japanese) - Keep It Warm, Painting
they should have leftist infighting as an event at the next olympics
no the fuck they shouldn't and it's liberals like you that are tearing us apart
holy shit, a gold medalist
Many lgbt teenagers and young adults growing up on the internet today have socially conservative beliefs that they voice at all times that they got from their conservative parents which they’ve never challenged because they think the life experience of being gay or trans makes them politically progressive
This is why I hate it when people say something homophobic and then go “so you’re really accusing me, a whole ass lesbian, of being homophobic 🙄” like yeah
Just because you’re part of an oppressed party does not mean you cannot hold bias against other groups or members of your own group. Bias is learned and ingrained through society and family and it takes real work to unlearn it. No one is perfect, no one is without bias and you are in fact going to fuck up now and again—what matters is if you learn from it and grow.
this is what people are talking about when they say "do the work"
fuuuuck i just realized that the future idealized version of myself cant exist without current me being the catalyst for change and doing hard things. has anybody heard about this
Women in Shakespeare
Also like to point out that when her mother says “I was your mother much upon these years that you are now a maid,” (translation: I had you when I was your age) you have to remember her father’s words: “earth hath swallowed all my hopes but she,” (translation: all the other children died.) The whole plot point of Juliet being an only child is explained by her mother being a Margaret Beaufort type who had her first child too young and it damaged her past the point of being able to bear more children.
Margaret Beaufort died in 1509. She was a major player in the Wars of the Roses, the swirling on-again-off-again civil wars that consumed England from 1455-1487. Romeo and Juliet was written and first performed in the early 1590s. Your average English person of Shakespeare’s day would probably have had at least a vague understanding of who she was and what happened to her, because she was a key figure in recent history and was still getting passed around as a cautionary tale.
There are two great problems with what happened to Margaret (and that her parents are trying to do to Juliet). One is easy for modern people to spot (but was also a common response back in her own day). And that’s the moral implications of what was done to her. She was too young to be married, and it was horrifying that she was forced into it so young. Every one of the adults around her either acted immorally or failed to protect her. They were wrong. This is what modern people see, and it’s important to remember that people back in her day mostly agreed with it. You’re supposed to think it’s fucked up! When girls were married that young (and it didn’t happen often!) it was a formality 99% of the time. It was for dynastic or financial reasons (the girl has lots of money and/or land and/or a title that her husband wants), but the “couple” don’t consummate their marriage for years. And it’s not just that they would have separate bedrooms. They might not even live in the same country until the girl was in her late teens and physically and mentally mature enough to bear and raise kids. Hell, a lot of times they didn’t even meet until the girl was older! They had this thing called “proxy marriage” where you would have two separate ceremonies, in two separate places, with each party saying their vows separately, one in one city and the other in a different one. So, yeah, sure, the girl was technically married at 12, but she didn’t actually meet her “husband” in person until she was 17 and they didn’t start sleeping together until she was 20. That was a thing they did.
The other problem, the one that modern people don’t notice, is dynastic. See, marriage wasn’t generally because you loved someone. It was because you had the resources to support a family, and you or your family wanted to pool those resources with someone. It’s about “our family has these resources, and we want that to continue.” It’s about continuity across generations. It’s about making sure that your children and grandchildren have the best possible resources to survive and thrive, whether those resources are land or a trade or a title or money or whatever. In order for this to work, you have to have kids! The family and the family’s resources depend on the married couple having children. If the couple doesn’t have children, the marriage is a failure. And that failure affects not only the couple, but both families. This is a really big problem. And you can’t have just one kid to pass on the family name, because half of all kids die in early childhood. If you want to be safe, you need several kids, to be sure at least one will survive to adulthood (when they can marry and pass on the family name and resources.
You know what happens when a girl has her first pregnancy too young? She is very likely to either die in childbirth, or have complications that destroy her future fertility. Just like Margaret Beaufort. Just like Juliet’s mother. In other words, the marriage is a failure, not just for her, but also for her family, and her husband (who can’t divorce her, it’s not allowed except in extremely rare circumstances), and her husband’s family. So even the people who didn’t have a moral problem with adult men having sex with pubescent girls had a practical problem with girls married too young because you are very likely to destroy the entire purpose of the marriage by doing it. As Shakespeare reminds us in the play through Juliet’s mother having been married too young and only having one child.
Shakespeare is telling us “yeah, this is fucked up. but even if you’re the kind of awful person who doesn’t think girls marrying too young is morally wrong, it’s also a problem for practical and dynastic reasons, don’t forget that by doing this wrong thing you are very likely to destroy what you most want out of it.”
Interesting
It bears repeating:
don’t forget that by doing this wrong thing you are very likely to destroy what you most want out of it.”
yes, excellent discussion!
another thing i noticed, the year my local community shakespeare theater did r&j, and i made the costumes so i got to watch the show every night: part of why capulet is telling paris, take your time, get to know each other, no rush, is that he still has his nephew tybalt as his heir. as long as tybalt is in the picture, there is no pressure on juliet to go further with paris, than get acquainted. once tybalt is killed, then suddenly capulet needs an heir, he needs a husband for juliet, now, this week. (the role of capulet is best given to the actor in the company that can do over the top apoplexy, you need to believe his urgency comes at least in part by how clearly he could drop dead any moment from giving himself a stroke)
i feel like this play is often taught in middle schools as if it was somehow relevant to, or about, teen hormone storms. really it's got more to do with the social structures around family and inheritance. leaving that context out makes it confusing, why is capulet suddenly flipping from nice dad to evil dad?
art history matters.
I've been thinking about this play a lot lately. I really wanna highlight that Lord Capulet asks Paris to wait and get to know her, and to woo her, while Tybalt lives. While Tybalt is alive, Juliet has something of a reprieve, and her wellbeing as his only child matters more to Capulet. But once Tybalt has died, the gloves come off. Lord Capulet was worried about his daughter's wellbeing when he felt he had the space to care, but as soon as his dynasty is at stake, as soon as this becomes larger than Juliet's happiness, his consideration for her health and mental wellbeing get thrown away. Which also is due in part to the fact that Capulet's family is implicated in a brawl that has left several dead after the Prince's family EXPLICITLY told the Capulets and Montagues to stop fighting or face dire consequences, AND Capulet is trying to align himself with the Prince's family by marrying Juliet off to County Paris, a relative of the Prince. So to Lord Capulet, it is now less important that Juliet is happy, and more important than he reminds the Prince of his loyalty via this marriage and aligns his family with the Prince's before it's too late. And he believes this must be done, at any cost...until Juliet kills herself. And that's when he realises the devastating cost of treating his family as chess pieces. He realises his wrongdoing far too late.
Seriously Romeo and Juliet is HEAVY on the dynastic politics, and I think you can't fully understand the play without understanding how that all works, especially because the impact of dynastic marriages on women and girls is like. THE POINT of the play
Been meaning to make this for over a year; felt appropriate that it's my first project of 2025.
things you DO NOT need to be a man
a dick
he/him pronouns
XY chromosomes
things you DO need to be a man
the swiftness of a coursing river
the force of a great typhoon
the strength of a raging fire
the mysteriousness of the dark side of the moon
^this post was brought to you by LGBT^
Let's
Get down to
Business
To defeat the huns
Where's that omg not to be a lesbian thing when you need it. I'm too distracted by the hotness to google it.
The competence. The strength. The completely casual execution of skill. That leather belt and all of its compartments and whatnot. Mmmm.
Very frustrating when people try to insist ADHD isn't a disability. It is! It's disabling! There are a lot of things that I struggle with or just straight up can't do because of my ADHD, and it makes life more difficult for me. It's a disability! I get that you're trying to push back on the idea that having ADHD is inherently a bad thing, but that doesn't mean it's not a disability! Obviously living with a disability can be really hard and it's okay to have negative or complicated feelings about it, but having a disability isn't inherently bad. The message shouldn't be "ADHD is okay because it's not a disability." it should be "ADHD is a disability and that's okay."
