Y-clept Verklempt @dorotheian - Tumblr Blog

reminder to worldbuilders: don't get caught up in things that aren't important to the story you're writing, like plot and characters! instead, try to focus on what readers actually care about: detailed plate tectonics

olyia-stories

@dragonpyre any chance you could elaborate on this

dragonpyre

I grew up learning about land formations. Seeing fictional maps that don’t follow the logic and science of them makes me upset

serinos-kitt

What are the most common sins you’ve seen relating to this? I wanna know

dragonpyre

Mordor.

Why is the mountain range square. How did the mountain range form. Why is there one singular volcano in the center. Why does it act like a composite volcano but have magma that acts like it’s from a shield. If it’s hotspot based volcanic activity why is there only one volcano.

And then the misty mountains!!!! Why isn’t there a rain shadow!! And why is there a FOREST where the rain shadow should be!!!!!!!!

serinos-kitt

So what is a rain shadow?

lethalbutterfly

Wind blows clouds in from the sea, but mountains are so tall the clouds can't get past 'em, so you get deserts on the windward side of mountain ranges because clouds can't get there to water the land, or do so only very rarely.

derinthescarletpescatarian

Oh yeah nothing is more annoying than fantasy maps that can't get mountains, rivers and rain shadows right.

mindfulwrath

May I recommend my new favorite tool: Mapgen4. You start with a random seed and then add mountains, valleys, shallow water, or oceans as you like. You can adjust the wind direction to make wind shadows off the mountains fall where you want. You can adjust overall raininess to make the rivers larger or smaller, or have more or fewer tributaries. It works best for small, isolated landmasses (think islands more than continents) but as there’s no scale bar and it’s all slightly abstracted anyway you can do whatever you want with it. I’ve only just started playing with it but it’s SO FUN.

jeanjauthor

I do think this could be useful for writers! ...Caveat, if you're going to use this for making a map for anything published (digital or paper, even if it's only in a fanfic archive or whatever), please, please credit the creator and their program as how you made that map! The more ways information like this gets out there, the more useful it'll be to other writers, roleplaying game DMs/GMs, creators, etc.

oh-opossum

One of my favourites for mapping plates, biomes, etc is Tectonics.js. If you're familiar with how tectonics shape a planet, you can guess where the features go by toggling plates, crust thickness, etc. Between Mapgen4 and Tectonics.js, we've got some pretty sweet tools at our disposal.

brehaaorgana

More stuff!:

European Geosciences Union Blog — Beyond Tectonics: Building fictional worlds to better understand our own

Reshaping Reality's Worldbuilding Tips

Worldbuilding pasta's series, An Apple Pie from Scratch also check their resources page!

R/worldbuilding's Reading List. Also check out their collected resources link. This basic geology guide from 11 years ago is still nice.

Creating an Earth-Like Planet, and The Climate Cookbook (aka Geoff's Climate Cookbook) technically the climate cookbook is a part of Creating an Earth like Planet I think.

Related: Worldbuilding Workshop's "Working Out Climates Using Geoff’s Climate Cookbook." Which goes through using the resource in order to map make. Also just the Worldbuilding Workshop in General.

Madeline James Writes's Worldbuilding Guide

Worldbuilding 101 (this links to the Biomes section but there's like...everything.)

Also I would recommend looking into Landscape Archaeology as well! That's because Landscape archeology is basically adding the social/cultural layer on top of all that geology and geography. Environments change when communities live in them, and communities likewise adapt to various environments.

This is a short free introduction to the concept: "Notes on Landscape Archaeology." To summarize, Landscape archaeology sort of like...studies the relation of people to places/spaces (that is, landscapes) in time.

Also this paper [An Archeology of Landscapes] breaks down/introduces the key concepts that I learned which is first that you can form the "construct paradigm" of a landscape from settlement ecology, ritual landscapes, and ethnic landscapes.

And then the highlights of their summary of what constitutes defining a landscape:

Landscapes are not synonymous with natural environments. Landscapes are synthetic (Jackson, 1984, p. 156), with cultural systems structuring and organizing peoples’ interactions with their natural environments ...

Landscapes are worlds of cultural product ... Through their daily activities, beliefs, and values, communities transform physical spaces into meaningful places. ...

Landscapes are the arena for all of a community’s activities. Thus landscapes not only are constructs of human populations but they also are the milieu in which those populations survive and sustain themselves. A landscape’s domain involves patterning in both within-place and between-place contexts ...

Landscapes are dynamic constructions, with each community and each generation imposing its own cognitive map on an anthropogenic world of interconnected morphology, arrangement, and coherent meaning ...

Basically a "landscape" is made by a community living in an environment. Once you have a geological environment that makes sense, landscape archaeology is like... Basically how I feel confident knowing where trade routes would be on a map, where there are areas of continual high conflict, what kinds of agriculture exists where, etc. once the geological stuff is hammered out, it's like...I know how that would influence the local cultures and vice versa. At that point, it's easy to start marking the natural borders, settlements, trade/port cities, and even strategic fortresses. If you have properly put rivers on a map, then marking your port cities is effortless, basically.

Also:

This course syllabus for a Landscape Archaeology class is freely accessible. It includes an online resources page.

Place, Landscape, and Environment: Anthropological Archaeology in 2009

(Landscape Biographies is open access, as is Landscape Archaeology between Art and Science: From a Multi- to an Interdisciplinary Approach. But I wouldn't try to read every essay.)

dedicatedfollower467

If you are like me and find it helpful to have video reference for a process/activity in addition to a written guide, Artifexian is a YouTube channel that does a LOT of world building stuff and specifically he's in the process of creating a world following a lot of Worldbuilding Pasta's methodology!

#kaku no wa #fantasy writing #geography #geology

elierlick

Yet another new study debunked the basis for the anti-trans sports bans. It was never about sports but for creating legal avenues for exclusion and abjection. This is one of the largest analyses ever conducted, involving 52 studies and 6,485 trans people. Read the study here.

lucieslucidity

post so nice had to reblog it twice and force it down everyone's throats

fleshengine

At minimum about 4.5 thousand people liked this without reblogging it.

We gotta fix that.

dancinbutterfly

Progress.

Onwards!

onthedriftinthetardis

I can't access the full paper, but their conclusion is right there in the abstract:

While transgender women exhibited higher lean mass than cisgender women, their physical fitness was comparable. Current evidence is mostly low certainty and has heterogenous quality but does not support theories of inherent athletic advantages for transgender women over cisgender.

dailymanners

I am about going to gripe about something that's been really annoying me lately.

First let me start with a disclaimer that I am speaking generally here. Of course both the U.S. and Europe are both massive and diverse places containing hundreds of millions of people, and a lot of regional differences. Neither the U.S. or Europe are a monolith (although a lot of people on the internet speak of both places as a monolith, which I wish people would stop doing, since neither are).

I could be wrong about this, since I don't live in the U.S., and haven't visited everywhere in Europe. But between where I have visited in the U.S., and where I have visited / lived in Europe, and from what I know from my friends in the U.S. and friends in other European countries, I get the feeling that overall the U.S. has stricter disability access laws than a lot of places in Europe do, especially in regard to building codes.

Of course there are exceptions, I know New York city is abhorrently hostile in its design towards anyone elderly and/or disabled. Although when I visited New York city it really just felt on par with a lot of major European cities with how abhorrently inaccessible it was.

One example of this is that recently I saw a Reddit discussion where a USAmerican vacationing in France was surprised at how many staircases didn't have handrails, because according to this man handrails are required by law in the U.S.

The comments were all Europeans having an absolute field day with this. Pretty much all of the comments were some variation of "I can't believe Americans are too stupid and lazy to use the stairs without a handrail 🤣🤣🤣 what's wrong with you fat lazy stupid Americans that you can't even use stairs without a handrail 🤣🤣🤣 thank GOD I was born in Europe where I was just taught how to walk up and down the stairs on my own and don't need a handrail like a lazy fat stupid American 🤣🤣🤣"

A few people tried to gently point out that this was about accessibility for elderly and disabled people, and it's not cool to laugh at building codes that are about accessibility, but those commenters were usually shut down with some variation of "yeah well in MY European country if someone is disabled or becomes elderly we either move to a more accessible building or we modify our home to be more accessible, we don't sit around whining like a bunch of Americans that our building isn't already accessible 🙄"

Which is, such a cruel way to talk about accessibility. Why wouldn't disabled and elderly people deserve the same access to a building as anyone else? Are elderly and disabled people not allowed to visit friends and family? Anyone could get hit by a car today, and after that struggle with going up and down stairs without the use of a handrail for the next several months, years, possibly the rest of your life. It's so easy to feel smug when you can easily trot up and down the stairs without a handrail, but so cruel to be unwilling to consider anyone who struggles with stairs should maybe be allowed access to the same places as you.

Honestly when I go on vacation abroad with my elderly + disabled mother, it's often easier to go to the U.S. with her than other places in Europe, because the U.S. does tend to be more accessible (in my experience, and except for New York city ofc) making going around to different public places with my mom generally a lot easier than somewhere like France or the Netherlands.

Out of all the things you could clown on the U.S. about, why you gotta go for accessibility of all things? It's disgustingly ableist and ageist, and I have to wonder if these people actually just hate disabled people / accessible design, and are using the U.S. as an excuse to hate on disabled people and accessible design.

raincitygirl76

I’m a Canadian. Our disability access is probably better than much of Europe (although I haven’t visited a lot of different European countries). But it’s definitely worse than the USA.

The USA has something called the Americans With Disabilites Act (ADA), and apparently it works fairly well. An American in my WhatsApp group went to a figure skating championship in Toronto a while back and was stunned that the arena didn’t have wheelchair access for spectators. Because an American arena would have.

Not everything about the USA is awful. Not everything about Canada and Europe is great.

Also, I live in Vancouver. We didn’t have a subway system until 1986, that’s when the Skytrain was finally built. Several of the Skytrain stations were originally built with no elevators. People with wheelchairs were expected to enter or exit the system at a different station that did have wheelchair access. In 1986.

The system wasn’t built in 1896 or 1926, when wheelchairs were a newfangled idea. It was built in 1986. British Columbian Rick Hansen’s Man In Motion world wheelchair tour started in 1985 (in Vancouver).

Or well, the Skytrain was opened in 1986. Let’s say the plans for it were finalized by 1983, since it would’ve taken a few years to build. In 1983, there was already a substantial disability rights movement in Canada, but several Skytrain stations didn’t have elevators anyway, presumably because it was cheaper.

Naturally, it eventually became politically unacceptable to make wheelchair users (and people with strollers, and people with canes or walkers, and people with suitcases) skip a station because they hadn’t bothered to put an elevator in that station.

So those stations had to be retrofitted at vast expense to make them wheelchair-accessible. It probably would’ve been cheaper to just build them accessible from the start, in retrospect. But we didn’t have a Made In Canada version of the ADA, so it didn’t happen.

Also, wheelchair accessibility does not only help wheelchair users. It also helps people with babies or toddlers in strollers, people using walkers, crutches, or canes, travellers with heavy suitcases, elderly people, etc, etc. I take the Skytrain several days a week, and I see all those people taking the elevator instead of the stairs or escalators.

Rick Hansen - Wikipedia

solar-cycle

Anyone who wants to know why America/The USA has the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act), PLEASE look up "The Capitol Crawl." I saw a video of it at a disability centric school I went to. Hundreds of disabled people that couldn't walk dragged themselves up the Capitol steps- a famously giant staircase that leads to the places our legislation gets made. People were crawling up, risking their health, and lives to become visible. And while accessibility still isn't perfect (people on Disability have their income capped at $16,200 monthly, or about $19,440 yearly, any cent over, and you get no benefits and might as well die) we have some stuff. It was hard fought for, and people just fied out of sight beforehand. But we refused to let it keep happening. If anything, that is the opposite of lazy.

hasufin

"Disabled" is a minority which anyone can involuntarily become a member of at any point, with no warning.

It might be temporary - you could get in a bad car accident, be stuck in a wheelchair for a few months, and be restricted to the first floor of your home, shitting in a glorified bucket because bathroom doors are typically too narrow for any mobility access.

Or you could be unlucky and have to move - and good luck finding an accessible home - because it's never getting better.

But it can definitely happen to you.

You can find out that the three steps out your front door might as well be the Great Wall if you don't have a lot of help. That the sidewalk which you walk down every day is actually incredibly uneven and going over the bumps you never noticed before is agony.

you can find out tomorrow that you need to hire a special transportation service which shows up 45 minutes late to get to your doctors' appointment; that they disappear for an hour after the appointment and you're left sitting in your wheelchair wondering when you'll get home.

You might discover that the gods-be hospital, and specifically the orthopedics wing has a damned sill that's too high to take a wheelchair over without help. But nobody thought about that, because the people who built it weren't in a damned wheelchair.

The ADA is a great start. It forced Americans - who are, I admit, not notable for thinking about others - to acknowledge disabled people exist, and set some minimal standards.

It's not enough. And if you don't think it's relevant to you: you're wrong. It can be relevant to you at any moment, and it will almost certainly matter to you eventually.

So you should care now.

suaine

Those Europeans are assholes. They're also wrong, because as much as disability access is still a work in progress, we ARE working on it. It's a slow process because unlike the US, Europe is many sovereign countries who still have the right and responsibility to implement European law their own way and in largely their own time. US federal law doesn't leave a whole lot of wiggle room to states, but European law is a whole different beast. And many member states, including the big ones, drag their heels implementing anything coming from Brussels on so many topics.

In any case, disability access IS a big topic in Europe and there ARE laws but the dragging heels are a real problem. And those people pissing on the US in the OPs post? They're one of the reasons why.

thesetwoutes

For better or worse, the United States is a global leader in disability rights. When the United Nations began writing the aspirational Convention on the Rights of the Disabled, the starting point, the level of obligation that states who signed the convention were expected to rise toward, was "comply with the current state of American law."

The ADA is far from perfect; it's a federal law, so it only reaches as far as federal power does. Its bars on employment discrimination and retaliation have been systematically weakened by judges who hate the idea of worker power. Its remedies are woefully inadequate for most claimants. And as with too many claims in American law, it's way too easy to put ADA claims into arbitration where they essentially disappear from the system.

But keep in mind, when the world defined the gold standard of accessibility law, the gold standard was the United States, for better or worse.

luulapants

Story time:

In middle school biology, we did an experiment. We were given yams, which we would sprout in cups of water. We then had to make hypotheses about how the yams would grow, based on descriptions of yam plants in our books, and make notes of our observations as they grew.

Here’s what was supposed to happen: we were supposed to see that the actual growth of the plant did not resemble our hypotheses. We were then supposed to figure out that these were, in fact, sweet potatoes.

What actually happened was that every single student in every single class lied in their notes so that their observations perfectly matched their hypotheses. See, everyone assumed the mismatch meant they had done something wrong in the process of growing the plant or that they had misunderstood the dichotomous key or the plant identification terminology. And, thanks to the wonders of a public school education, everyone assumed the wrong results would get us a failing grade. We were trying to pass. We didn’t want to get bitched out by the teacher. Curiosity, learning, science - that had nothing to do with why we were sitting in that classroom. So we all lied.

The teacher was furious. She tried to fail every student, but the administration stepped in and told her she wasn’t allowed to because a 100% fail rate is recognized as a failure of the teacher, not the class. It wasn’t even her fault, really, though her being a notorious hard-ass didn’t help. It was a failure of the entire educational system.

So whenever I see crap like Elizabeth Holmes’s blood test scam or pharmaceutical trials which are unable to be replicated or industry-funded research that reaches wildly unscientific conclusions, I just remember those fucking sweet potatoes. I remember that curiosity dies when people are just trying to give their superiors the “right” answers, so they can get the grade, get the job, get the paycheck. It’s not about truth when it’s about paying rent. There’s no scientific integrity if you can’t control for human desperation.

usa2024election

hometoursandotherstuff

partywithponies

Strange racists and homophobes on the internet seem to have access to an alternate way cooler version of TV than me. "every white character on TV is in an interracial relationship" "every show has a gay couple in it" "main characters keep having to secretly be bisexual and nonbinary" "every show has gratuitous full frontal nudity" like damn promise?? What channel???

urlocalpyshcopan

as a black gay person real like where y'all be finding this stuff pass the name

brainsforbabyjesus

for real though, those DO NOT WATCH OR YOU'LL CORRUPT YOUR CHILDREN lists put out by conservative christian family groups is where I find all the stellar tv shows. Like, shit I didn't know half of those existed, thanks for finding them for me, gonna go watch 30 hours of gay tv now!

infamousbrad

I think I know how this works.

For personal context, before I went to the '98 Burning Man festival, one of the things I'd read from a couple different journalists was that "everybody" runs around naked. Which, fine by me, I'd already spent a lot of time in clothing-optional spaces, I'm not fanatic about it but it's nice.

So I got there early and set up a public shade structure on one of Black Rock City's main roads and spent most of each afternoon just watching the crowds go by. I don't remember seeing more than one actually naked person the whole week. I think a topless woman passed by my intersection maybe every half an hour, sometimes once an hour. So why in the hell were people, normally pretty smart and observant writers, coming away with the impression that everybody was naked?

Then I remembered an unrelated passage from Joel Garreau's great book about the history of the outer-ring suburbs, Edge City. Mall developers told him flat-out that they tried to keep the crowds in their malls less than 5% black. Not because they themselves were racist, but because they had determined, experimentally, that if more than 5% of the people in the mall are black, the median white shopper will wrongly describe the mall as at least half black, as mostly black. And not a few of them would describe it, at 6% black, as a mall where "only black people go." Why?

Because, emotionally, they were still upset over the last one when the next one came into view.

Same as the journalists describing Black Rock City as all naked. Same as the right-wing religious culture warriors describing television as entirely mixed-race and gender non-conforming. Not because it's even vaguely true, we know that, but because they haven't gotten over their discomfort over the last one by the time the next one comes along. The anger, not the stimulus, is the part that's continuous, so their mind lies to them that it's "all" the thing they can't get over.

kagedtiger

Similar effect for the presence/proportion of women in things, by the way: https://health.howstuffworks.com/mental-health/human-nature/perception/how-17-equals-496-the-amazing-multiplying-women.htm

jayalaw

What’s the solution then? Or if there’s no solution, should we make things even queerer and more diverse?

crazy-pages

The solution is societal change, not giving into this shit wherever you have any say, and knowing how the effect works so you can push back against it most effectively. And that's frankly been effective, though we could be doing much better.

Also thank you @infamousbrad, for the framing of bigots still being pissed off by the next time they get pissed off. That's really helpful for understanding exactly how the mindset works.

fictionadventurer

I have to be careful about reading too many Christian themes into Star Wars, because at the end of the day this is based on Eastern philosophy, but it's hard not to, because Chapter One of the Revenge of the Sith novelization gives us an Obi-Wan and Anakin that are such a good representation of humility vs. arrogance.

Obi-Wan is the amazing pilot who doesn't like to fly. The master swordsman who has no idea that he's a master swordsman. He's a Jedi Master with a spot on the Council, and he still deals with imposter syndrome. Other masters present him to the younglings as the ideal Jedi, and he doesn't even know it. He has no thought of his own glory, he just does whatever task he's given and wants to do it well. He does what he can, leaves the rest to the will of the Force, and he's a great Jedi.

Anakin is far and away the most powerful Jedi there's ever been--he's the strongest, the fastest, the most brilliant pilot, the most daring swordsman--and he knows it. So he thinks he deserves honor and authority and a place on the council, and it galls him when he doesn't get it. Being the best Jedi, to him, doesn't mean being the one who best lives up to the ideals, but being the strongest. And he's strong, and only getting stronger, and he needs to be strong enough to save everyone, because that's the only thing he can rely on. It's no wonder that he falls, because all his greatness is driven by fear and pride.

It's not like any of this is a new observation, but it's just so great to see it all laid out so clearly.

rangerlexi

rewatched Wake Up Dead Man last night and something struck me about the scene right before the phone call with Louise.

Blanc picks up the Jesus figurine - the last piece of the box they haven't dismantled to search. And he looks up at Jud, almost asking permission—

—which Jud gives immediately, because he sees where Blanc is going with that (it's hollow, there could be a clue inside).

and at first I was like. oh haha Blanc looks at the priest to get permission to smash the Jesus figurine. and then I was like. oh. Blanc looks at the priest to get permission to smash the Jesus figurine, and the priest doesn't even hesitate.

yeah, it's a cheap trinket, of course it doesn't really matter if they break it. but look at the context of the scene! Jud is getting swept away in the mystery, in Blanc's game of crime-solving, and forgetting his real priorities. As he puts it later:

Jud: IT IS A GAME! ... And by using me in it, you're setting me against my real and only purpose in life! Which is not to fight the wicked and bring them to justice, but to serve them and bring them to Christ. Otherwise I'm just as bad as Wicks, making it about me and not Jesus.

Because as we all know, the scene immediately after smashing the figurine is when Jud calls Louise. And he's impatient. He's rushing her. He's trying to get the answer, to solve the crime, and Blanc is there in the background urging him on. When Louise says, can I ask you something? his answer is if you can make it quick.

and then.

It shocks Jud out of his impatience and focus on the crime. Where before he was talking quickly and speaking over Louise, he now stops and takes his time, actually considering what to say and, more importantly, listening to her.

As she talks, Jud looks at Blanc, who is still like ?? but who, to his credit, doesn't try to rush the conversation when he sees the look on Jud's face. And then he looks at the Jesus figurine.

Which he allowed, and encouraged, Blanc to destroy. Just like he's allowing and even encouraging Blanc to destroy the members of his church, who he is supposed to serve. Making it about him and not Jesus.

road to Damascus moment.

this scene is masterful for so many reasons, but I love the use of the Jesus figurine to symbolize Jud's relationship to the church, and how Blanc interacts with that relationship. Because Blanc asks!! He doesn't just break the figurine, he waits for Jud to agree. None of this is on Blanc (aside from perhaps his characteristic flippancy about murder), he's just doing his job. As an atheist, he has no qualms about dismantling religious systems and bringing people to justice instead of extending grace, and he's not the bad guy for that! We have two whole movies before this where it's clear that Blanc's methods work and are the right thing in certain circumstances!

It's just that in this circumstance, they fundamentally conflict with Jud's core beliefs, and it's on Jud to hold himself to those standards and set that boundary with Blanc. Once he does, Blanc reassesses his methods and respects Jud's wishes.

Jud just needed this scene to remind him of those beliefs.

headspace-hotel

Y'all ever open a book on a new subject, read a little bit, and have to put it back so you can process the way in which your mind was just expanded?

headspace-hotel

The textile book: okay here is some of the ways that textiles are important to human life

me: Okay!

The textile book: Clothes separate the vulnerable human body from the conditions of the outside world, and in doing so absorb the sweat and debris of human existence, accumulating wear and tear according to the lives we live. In this way, various lifestyles and professions are represented by clothing, and the clothing of a loved one retains the imprint of their physical body and their life being lived, as though the clothes absorb part of the wearer's soul

Me: ...oh

The textile book: The process of weaving a garment and the process of a child being formed in its mother's womb are often referred to using the same language. Likewise, when a baby is born, a blanket or other textile material is the first material object it encounters and protects it. Textiles can create the idea of two things being inextricable, as with being "woven together," or can create the sense of separateness, as with a curtain or veil that separates two rooms or spaces, even separating the living from the dead, or separating two realities, such as a performance ending when the curtain falls

Me: ...oh God

The textile book: Odysseus's wife Penelope undid her weaving in secret every night to delay the advances of her suitors. In this way she was able to turn back the passage of time to allow her husband to come home. Likewise the Lakota tell a story of an old woman embroidering time by embroidering a robe with porcupine quills. If she finishes the embroidery, the world will come to an end, but her faithful dog pulls out the quills whenever her back is turned, turning back the clock and allowing existence to continue.

me: ...is...is...is that why we refer to the fabric of space and time?

The textile book: The technological revolution of textile making is sadly underappreciated. The textile arts are possibly the most fundamental human technology, as once people created string and rope, they could create nets for catching fish and small animals, and bags and baskets for carrying food. In the earliest prehistoric times, the first string or cord perhaps came from sinew, found in the body of an animal. Because of this perhaps the body of a living being could be understood as made of a textile material. Indeed textiles have the function of preserving life, as with a surgeon stitching back together the human body or bandages being placed on a wound. Textile technologies are being used to create life-changing implants to restore function to injured parts of the body, as though a muscle or tendon can be woven and made in this way. Cloth can be used to create a parachute that will save a human's life as they plummet out of the sky. Ultimately, the textile technologies are used to enter new parts of the universe. [Photo of an astronaut and details explaining the astronaut's suit]

Me: STOP!! MY MIND IS NOT STRONG ENOUGH FOR THIS

headspace-hotel

The book is "Textiles: The Whole Story" by Beverly Gordon

unlettered-heathen

:D this is it! The post that got me to borrow this book from my library! This book is constantly rewiring my brain and parts of it constantly slap me in the face when I am going thru daily life and notice textiles.

Like, fiberglass ANYTHING can be considered a textile! Paper? Textile! Chain link fence? Textile!

And more than ever now when I see something like fabric on a couch or mosquito netting I wonder just how much work it would have taken if it was non-factory made. How many people have still had their hands in making it now.

I never understood why so many cultures placed such importance on textile gifts as ritual, like many native americans gifting blankets. I get it now.

Tons of other stuff too and it's all the time!

And I'm only halfway through!

Anyways OP thank you for bringing this into my life it's literally reshaping the way I think in a way I'm constantly in awe of <3

(the book if anyone was curious)

foodforthineownminds

Here! I found it in an online archive!

It functions as a digital library, so you have to sign in and wait your turn. I'm not sure why you have to do that with a digital book, but it's free so i don't care.

304 p. : 27 cm

reynard61

Let's ambush mama! 😼

#gekiteki na seibutsu #quasi classical symmetry

thecolorofthegame

I know this trophy is supposed to represent a triathlon, but it looks like a cyclist award for attacking pedestrians

ceruleana

project hail mary is a touching and poignant film that leaves you asking questions about humanity like, "wow what if all mainstream media was genuinely good" and "what if book adaptions actually gave a shit about the book in question" and "what if studios hired actors that could actually act, and then let them get a lil wacky with it"

astriiformes

#Don’t forget ‘what if puppetry was treated as a serious artform’ (via @specialagentartemis)

louisetaylor

the lotr movies got eowyn wrong. yes the fighting was cool. "i am no man" scene was badass. but the point of eowyn is not "woman wants to fight, isn't allowed to, eventually gets to fight and that's her happy ending."

the point of eowyn is "woman is depressed, wants to be free/respected/seen/known/loved, is put in a (metaphorical) box with the other women, wants to fight bc it will bring her either Respect or Death."

she kills the dang Witch King. she fights and wins and it's awesome and satisfying. but fighting is NOT her happy ending. it's her sad ending. she ends up wounded and broken, like everyone else in this stupid WWI-trauma story. Like Frodo. Like Faramir.

I cannot emphasize enough that Faramir meets her AFTER she is UNABLE to fight (the only thing she thought gave her value and honor) and STILL admires and respects and loves her. Eowyn is more than a fighter. Eowyn is more than what she does. And for someone like me who's disabled from doing a lot of things that society expects of me, that means a lot.

tofupixel

thanks to the onion of determination i have finished my drawing of the onion of determination 🙏

sketched in aseprite and finished in pixquare (30% off code tofu)

Prints // Merch // Tip Jar // Digital Store // Free Stuff

ilexvici

Tribbles have picked the wrong man to mess with

startrekrenegades

[[*TNG theme song plays* *Patrick Stewart runs outside and shouts* YOU MOTHERFCKERS ARE GONNA KILL ALL MY LILIES *shoots guns twice* PEST CONTROL! *TNG theme song*]]

rita-lashette

Best. Thing. Ever.

takemetotheenterprise

I can’t express how to ecstatic I am to find this video again in the depths of tumblr. It might be one of my favourite posts

fforsythiaaa

Once when I was in undergrad, someone described something as “problematic” in class and our professor was like, “That’s cool, but ‘problematic’ doesn’t really mean anything. It means that the thing you’re describing has a problem, and in and of itself that’s not bad. Art, especially, should always have problems, or else it’s not interesting and not art, either. It sounds like you’re trying to say that this is bad, but you don’t want to say ‘bad.’ Is that right?”

So from then on whenever one of us called something problematic, he would make us talk it out until we could name the “bad” thing we were hinting at. In this particular class, 7/10 it was some type of oppression, and the remainder was like, “I’m uncomfortable because this is very new/confusing/pushing boundaries that made me feel safe.”

Once we stopped calling things “problematic” and stopping at that, class got way more interesting and... we all had to say, like, “that’s racist” or “that’s misogynistic” or “ew capitalism gross” out loud, which a lot of us had never done in a classroom before. Or we had to be like, “Uhhh... I’m not sure what’s so bad?” and confront our own beliefs and that was maybe even more useful.

Anyway. Whenever I see the word problematic, I can’t help but think of this professor being like, “Good starting point, now let’s get specific.” I think when we have to commit to saying “that’s ___” it requires a lot more careful thought about the truth and impact and complexities of whatever we’re claiming. Sometimes there really is some bullshit afoot, and also sometimes it’s art, and it should be full of problems, because that’s what art is.

hypokeimena

#'this is present in the text' is often a good first step #but those second and third ones (naming it; describing its function) are vital (via @elucubrare)

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Y-clept Verklempt