[id: “palestine is dividing the left!” no, it’s defining the left. you’re not on it.]

Andulka
Noah Kahan
The Bowery Presents

oozey mess

if i look back, i am lost
Mike Driver

bliss lane
ojovivo

roma★
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
Claire Keane
Doug Jones
Sweet Seals For You, Always
NASA

@theartofmadeline
Today's Document
Misplaced Lens Cap
KIROKAZE
noise dept.

gracie abrams
seen from United States
seen from France
seen from Belarus

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Congo - Brazzaville
seen from Mexico
seen from Mongolia
seen from United States
seen from Mexico

seen from Venezuela
seen from Mexico

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
@crimbletrick
[id: “palestine is dividing the left!” no, it’s defining the left. you’re not on it.]
trans women:
center yourself in language that includes you. if it includes women like you, it includes you. it's not "them" it's "us". women are your peers. when someone says ladies that means you. keep reminding yourself. don't forget. it is a fact. treat it like one. you HAVE to treat yourself like a woman. keep reminding yourself. keep reminding yourself.
this this this this.
that song is about you. that advertisement applies to you. when someone tries to lift women's self esteem it's supposed to be lifting YOUR self esteem. how many songs come on the radio telling women they're beautiful??? that's YOU. you're beautiful. take it seriously. take yourself seriously. you ARE a girl and you HAVE to act like it. if you don't treat yourself like a woman, and you ARE one, then you're not treating yourself like a person, and THAT IS SELF HARM. you HAVE to treat yourself like a girl. it isn't optional.
i think we should start openly mocking male creatives who can't figure out how to write women. like actually i think it's embarrassing that it took elliot page transitioning for christopher nolan to give him a good role. why did it take like ten years to get the first female lead in a marvel movie? why is it a Known Fact that stephen king can't write women? why is 50% of the population omitted from large ensemble works? i asked my friend to name a movie directed by a man with a majority female cast and he said ghostbusters 2016. ghostbusters. ghostbusters. g
while they share a similar base flavor, dick tastes more umami while pussy tastes more acidic, though recent menstruation conveys an overwhelming metallic flavor that some diners object to (though i am not one of them). recommended wine pairings are
(today i learnt that if you don’t know how a post should end, just post it unfinished anyway and someone else will come up with an ending)
mozzarella and parmesan is kind of like the age gap yuri of cheese
the best death note joke format will forever be L asking light a simple question in which logical answer A might increase the likelihood of light being kira and logical answer B similarly might increase the likelihood of light being kira and after a short internal struggle light comes up with answer Y, which no human being has ever thought of as being a normal response in all of living history
the "what are your pronouns" comic is my fave example.
For those unfamiliar, or simply wanting to see it again:
i love this guy
sun tsu famously said "refuse to understand your enemy at all costs. to resist their cognitohazard mind rays"
there's an extraordinarily common yet terrifying cognitohazard called "the chance to convince me im wrong" and i work all day to defend myself from its ravages
I intend to pour resin over everything so nothing ever changes again
Can confirm that the tadc fandom has a huge problem with transphobia.
No, just because you hate a character doesn't mean you have the right to misgender them.
Jax is a woman and there's no question about it, stop acting like there's been no signs since episode one.
You lack media literacy if you can't comprehend the implications of Jax being a trans woman since the pilot.
It's not funny, you're just a piece of shit.
*sending my nothing beams at you*
*blasting you with nothing*
These posts are sisters
shoving the tardis up my neopussy call that time dilation
-the doctor telling me that my surgery site is healing well at my 6-month checkup
The problem with being low support needs is that people mentally autocorrect that to “no support needs” and then proceed to give you absolutely nothing and then get surprised when you implode after six months.
grace you gotta lock in
Every time Sean Astin makes a statement on whether or not Sam and Frodo were indeed gay for each other in lord of the rings he’s always like “well we have to acknowledge that attitudes around sexuality have changed dramatically over the past several decades and since authorial intent is only up to speculation, the story is open to multiple readings, some of which might have different significances for different groups of people also they kiss on the lips because I said so”
at the rose city comic con panel this month a fan asked them (sean and elijah) if sam and frodo were in love and they said
Sean: .....yes. absolutely
Elijah: 100 percent.
Sean: dont tell rosie
Rosie: "This is my husband Sam, and that's his husband, Frodo. Frodo is my husband-in-law. I'm not into him, he's he's a bit too 'elfy' for my taste, but Sam likes him, and that's fine with me. As far as I know, Frodo can't give Sam children, but Frodo looks after ours all the same, so I don't mind sharing Sam if it means another pair of eyes on the wee ones. In all honesty, our family tree is right simple compared to some hobbits. Yes, I'm referrin' to you Lobelia, over there pretendin' you ain't eavesdroppin'. Still bitter you ain't got either of my boys or their house, eh?"
Tbh it's canon that Frodo invited Sam and Rosie to move in to Bag End after their wedding and they all lived there for a couple of years until Frodo went to Valinor, so yeah. Running with it.
And once Rosie dies, Sam says his goodbyes and disappears after him.
what’s funny is people assuming that rosie would somehow be too dim or naive to KNOW that sam loved frodo, instead of looking at a guy who would loyally follow a beloved friend to hell and then help carry him home again, and not be like ‘oh i can’t not fuck that.’
Polyamory, specifically polyandry, would be an interesting solution to the oddball population of the Shire.
The Shire is excellent farming country, with consistently good weather, and only one tough winter in living memory; hobbits like to produce large families; they’re resistant to disease, rarely violent, and encounter few dangers. It is usual for hobbits to produce many children, so that (for example) Bilbo and Frodo are unusual in both being only children, with no siblings, and not having children of their own. All of this should point to a population that increases every generation if not doubling outright. Young people (and their ideologies!) should rapidly outnumber the old with an ever-increasing effect and impact on society. However, the Shire has a surprisingly stable history; it never seems to increase or decrease greatly in population, and the bell curve of age seems… demographically balanced? There certainly isn’t a conflict from rising young bloods challenging the middle-aged reactionaries; there’s no unemployment; there are no housing crises or waves of emigration, or even a tendency for young people leaving home to marry. Meanwhile, not only does the Shire not suffer from internal pressures, but it remains obscure and hardly noticed in global politics.
What makes sense here is that adult hobbits form a loose group. Four parents in a polycule, between them all, may produce four children. All four parents claim to have four children. An outsider would assume this meant the adults had eight children.
Hobbits therefore are not especially fertile or fecund. They simply have large families. Much of their interest in genealogy is due to the complex relationships of blood-kin, hearth-kin, love-kin and pledge-kin, who must all be carefully tracked and measured - not just because you need to make sure that you don’t climb into bed with an un-permitted degree of blood-kin, but to track family alliances and carefully quantify the precise level of thoughtfulness to put into the proper present to gift your father’s lover’s lover (too much implies a degree of intimacy that might upset the polycule.)
Thus, while a hobbit matron may tell a startled dwarf that she has seven sons, she might only have borne five of them herself, and have one hearth-son by her wife, and a pledge-son of her first husband’s. There are between three and four fathers involved at various stages of production, from conception to pledge-duty, but there is debate about the precise number of fathers, as one child was festival-conceived and therefore provisionally pledged to the Brandybucks until more distinctive paternal traits should materialise. It’s expected that four of the sons will be uninterested in women, and their contribution to family life will be in raising hearth-children and pledge-duty. However, this level of detail is normally negotiated later in conversation, as a mutual overture of friendship. So she’s just clear and simple: yes, certainly, she has seven sons. Yes, they’re all hers. Yes, that’s fairly normal - yes, hobbits like big families. How big? That’s really hard to say! Well, about thirteen hobbits live in her house… er, she has forty-three nieces and nephews. Yes! She has nine siblings, that’s correct, but some of them are still babies themselves..
In this way, a bewildered dwarf might assume that hobbits are absurdly fertile, producing an average of seven children per couple, at an absurd pace.
When in fact, with about half of hobbits never bearing biological children, the population of hobbits is pretty much always the same.
Tl:dr, hobbit population works perfectly well, both internally and in the perceptions of outsiders, if the majority of the Shire is gay, they’re all polyamorous, and they all firmly claim to be parents of high numbers of children. Of course Frodo fathered Sam’s kids - he named them! They were pledge-kin but not hearth-kin, as Frodo needed a lot of quiet and stability in the home.
No outsider ever parses hobbit genealogy well enough to understand this except for Gandalf, who never explains anything either.
are you kidding? Gandalf would WEAPONIZE his knowledge of Hobbit genealogy against outsiders
Since “pledge” kinships are multidimensional and can occur in different directions, hobbits can form - and formalise - family bonds simply because they choose to. Gandalf doesn’t tell anyone that the formation of Thorin’s Company, the Fellowship of the Ring, and Belladonna Took’s Accidental Troop of Mercenaries* are legal formations of pledge-siblings, a hobbit family structure usually claimed to increase social class and prestige (as high numbers of pledge-kin confer distinction on a hobbit, being a sort of popularity vote/endorsement that adds greatly to their social power. Incidentally, this is partly why Bilbo was both controversial and successful in his pledge-claim of Frodo; outsiders mistook his “bachelor” status as someone living outside of heteronormativity, while the Shire was bewildered and increasingly annoyed by his rejection of pledge and hearth commitments. By rights Bilbo had too few pledge-kin, and too little parenting experience, to claim rights to an orphan, especially one from Brandybuck hearth; but conversely, his social status was high enough that his belated bid for his very first pledge-son couldn’t reasonably be denied by anybody.)
In short, all of the hobbits enjoyed achieving even larger families on their adventures, legally and without argument or debate. It’s free real estate. If nobody else is going to sibling these losers, we will. (The condensation of so many entanglements at once also legally made Pippin his own father-in-law.)
Gandalf never explained.
* see the post about the Old Took’s “enchanted diamond cufflinks” that obeyed the wearer’s commands; which were probably, given the general state of things, two lost silmarils recovered by his Remarkable Daughters and gifted to him because things stay small and safe in the shire
@elodieunderglass wouldn't that make pippin both denethor's pledge-son-in-law, and (as pledge-brother to the king) probably outrank him?
Only through Boromir while Boromir was alive! Pippin’s familial claim through Boromir technically dissolved on Boromir’s death, as Denethor hadn’t been privy to it, and those bonds rarely stretch to a stranger when the person in the middle has died before introducing them; although Pippin, who was well-brought-up, perfectly and politely rectified the problem at once by simply swearing himself as Denethor’s pledge-son. but through his blood-cousinship to Frodo, who was older than Boromir, his status as the Took double-primarc (don’t ask) and the proximity-enhanced status-doubling effects of having a five-way cousin in Merry, Pippin was demonstrably higher status as a pledge-sibling and was also his own father-in-law and approved of himself. As such, he would have significantly raised Boromir’s social status and marital prospects in the Shire.
Inheritance follows parent-child pledge as the primary consideration, with matrilineal descent as the secondary. Pippin would have been bewildered to gradually understand that Denethor held his two sons in such odd and different standing :-/ hobbits don’t recognise kingship so it would’ve been very upsetting and disappointing to Pippin to understand how Denethor stood in position of sworn-father to a whole city of people without even being slightly fair to his younger hearth-son. Aragorn is demonstrably much better dad-material and therefore had Pippin’s vote. Pippin, by virtue of being an excellent father-in-law to a spectacularly promising young son-in-law, also considered himself a better candidate for king of Gondor than Denethor, by outranking him in Dad Competence - but was too busy by the time he realized this to point this out .
Ironically, the events in which Pippin realized this made Faramir his own hearth-son - so Pippin won in the end and took a great interest in ceremonially approving of Eowyn. Gandalf never explained
I will buy that for a dollar, yup.
It crossed my dash again! The Hobbit Polyamory Post!
I love how @elodieunderglass had multiple posts of very in-depth genealogical discussions pointing out myriad implications and solutions all caused by adventuring parties being legally family under Shire law, and then ends each one with "Gandalf never explained". You bet your ass he never explained. Probably kept that information to himself to drop on people when they least expected it.
Gandalf: so, are you going to visit your counts on fingers brother's second son, Merry?*
Aragorn: splutters in confusion
*I think I have that correct for Sam's son? Or is it a more complicated relationship?
I like to have fun!