Abbi Jacobson and D'Arcy Carden in A League of Their Own
YOU ARE THE REASON

ellievsbear
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"

oozey mess
ojovivo
KIROKAZE

Kiana Khansmith
Misplaced Lens Cap
will byers stan first human second
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year

@theartofmadeline
Jules of Nature

No title available
cherry valley forever
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
noise dept.
sheepfilms
RMH
Today's Document

tannertan36
seen from Russia
seen from Belarus

seen from Türkiye

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Colombia

seen from United States
seen from Colombia
seen from Colombia

seen from Colombia
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 Finland
seen from Spain
@into-unfathomable-life
Abbi Jacobson and D'Arcy Carden in A League of Their Own
Blue Green Colors Flashin - Michel Buylen , 2025.
Belgian, b. 1953 -
Acryl on panel , 30 x 40 cm.
Blue Green Colors Flashin - Michel Buylen , 2025.
Belgian, b. 1953 -
Acryl on panel , 30 x 40 cm.
Mirror on Highway 280 - Eileen David , 2026.
American , b. 1952 -
Oil on panel , 8 x 8 in.
What I Like About Poetry by Ellen Bass
ammonite (2020) dir. francis lee
patreon // buy prints here
So for the record because I've seen sooooo many phm posts going around using slurs. Yes, people in the intersex community are aware that hermaphrodite is used in biological contexts to mean "animal that produces both male and female gametes." Yes, it's still a slur in that context, and was adopted in biological circles from its usage as a slur. The word has been used as a slur against intersex people since at least the 14th century. It came into use in biological contexts in the 18th century. This is a word that spent 400 years being used as a slur before it was used to mean an animal that produces two types of gametes.
Yes, Eridians only have one sex. I obviously don't speak for the entire intersex community, but the terms that intersex advocates suggest using alternatively are "cosexual" or "monoecious." Both of these terms describe organisms with male and female reproductive organs, or which produce both male and female gametes. If you're in the camp where you think Eridians only produce one type of gamete, an appropriate term would be "isogamistic."
We don't use the r-slur to refer to people with intellectual disabilities, despite the fact this was the commonly accepted medical term for many, many years. It was used in medical contexts. It was used in American federal law until 2009. The language has changed. Please be kind to your fellow fandom members and use a term to refer to Eridians that does not have a history as an intersexist slur.
“Different from the Others” is considered one of the first sympathetic portrayals of gay men on film. It was nearly destroyed
Richard Oswald’s Different from the Others was a radical silent film produced in 1919 during the Weimar Republic. And it was almost erased from history.
Different from the Others was co-written by Oswald and renowned sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld, who also played a role in the film and partially funded it through his Institute for Sexual Science. The film follows a doomed gay relationship between a successful concert violinist and one of his students and explores the impact of homophobia, conversion therapy and the threat of being outed. The film was intended to rally against Paragraph 175 of the German Penal Code, the 1871 law that criminalized homosexuality. Different from the Others is considered one of the first sympathetic portrayals of gay men in cinema, and it was praised by audiences. But conservative Catholic, Protestant and antisemitic groups protested the co-writers’ Jewish identities and the film’s thesis that homophobia, not homosexuality, was a social evil. Different from the Others was censored throughout Germany in 1920 following claims that the film would endanger public safety or turn impressionable young people gay. By October of 1920, only doctors and medical researchers were able to view it via private educational screenings.
Building on Carrer Muntaner (Double Balcony) - Pep Encinas , 2025.
Catalan , b. 1962 -
Pencil on paper , 75 × 54 cm.
Shoot - Michel Buylen.
Belgian, b. 1953 -
Oil on panel , 18 x 13 cm.
Make the most of your July.
July 8th, 1965 Anne Sexton: A Self-Portrait in Letters First published: 1977
Heat waves.
having a cozy start of autumn by reading stuff about the charioteer and relistening to the audiobook😌 uwu
from History's Queer Stories: Retrieving and Navigating Homosexuality in British Fiction about the Second World War by Natalie Marena Nobitz
@mademoiselle-red 'Interesting points on how the novel engages with Plato! I cringe at this and other analyses of the novel that claim Laurie’s attraction to Ralph was initially and primarily physical though. They always ignore the emotional attachment imo'
Yes I agree! That was one of the things I didn't agree with. I think emotional is the right way to describe it.
Though perhaps I am biased since I used to be a 'Ralph girl'. I used to consider the ending to be a happy one but I am not so sure now
But I still think there's more than physical attraction, even though it's not the intellectual attraction he feels for Andrew. Idk although they do represent those sides of attraction, I don't think it's so clear-cut, because although they're all parts of 'the charioteer' metaphor? allegory? they're also more fully-fledged characters than that and don't just have one single function and that's it, and Laurie's attractions are more nuanced in my opinion as well even though he and the metaphor give the functions of white and black horse to Andrew and Ralph
Yes! The metaphors are inadequate analogies for capturing the complexity of his feelings for both men and their three dimensional personalities. That’s something that Laurie also learns throughout the book: when he tries to apply the platonic model to his love interests, he denies them their humanity. He thinks he can protect Andrew’s “innocence” but robs him instead of his agency. He tries to dismiss Ralph as the unruly immoral dark horse (“too many Bunnies”), which prevents him from seeing Ralph’s innocence (both his innocence in the accusation of visiting Andrew, and his “curious innocence” about love and sacrifice, as Alec tells Laurie at the party).
I disagree with the analysis that Laurie betrays his convictions and let the black horse win. It is rather sloppy literary analysis, in my opinion, to look at the protagonist’s growth and change at the end of a coming-of-age novel and call it a “betrayal” of their convictions. In the end, Laurie learns that there is more to love than the model of love as a ethical ideal, the love as the shared pursuit of philosophy presented in the Plato, more than following the “hard logic” of the platonic model. Laurie learns through his relationship with Ralph that love is also forgiveness, kindness, compassion. In the end, he finally sees Ralph’s vulnerability and innocence about love, and is then able to fulfill his long cherished desire to protect and save Ralph. By doing so, he levels the playing field between them: he now protects and takes responsibility for Ralph as Ralph does for him. In Renault’s rewriting of the charioteer myth at the very end, the black horse doesn’t win, but rather the white and black horses are reconciled, only for one night because they can never be reconciled forever: it’s the human condition to be pulled in two directions by reason and emotion. I would also note here that when Laurie was with Andrew, the black horse was fully suppressed, which mirrors how Laurie’s pain and physical senses were suppressed by medication. His journey to true medical recovery and the return of his sexual desire coincides with and is facilitated by his reunion with Ralph. Laurie is not “destined to be Ralph’s lover for now because Andrew is not ready to face the truth”, Laurie is Ralph’s lover because he chooses to confide in Ralph and spend time with Ralph again and again, because they have so much in common: their disabilities, war experiences, their shared past, their tendency to interfere in other people’s lives, their shared sense of humor, their shared intellectual (!!!) interest in queer philosophical and literary figures. Furthermore, Andrew is not ready to face the truth because Laurie chooses to keep him at arm’s length as the platonic ideal rather than get to know him as a human being. Note how we and Laurie don’t see Andrew’s room, his belongings, his quirks, but we get details of Ralph’s quirks and belongings. I believe Laurie uses protecting Andrew from sexual knowledge as an excuse to reject Andrew’s attempts to deepen their friendship. Andrew is treated like a vessel for philosophical intercourse (which seems to be the purpose of love in Plato’s model) and a surface for protecting Laurie’s platonic ideals, but the close third person narrator never observes how he eats, how he likes his tea (!!!!), what few personal belongings he has in his room that he shares with other people, what books he likes to read, what his friends and acquaintances are like as people, and what he thinks of them. Laurie is Ralph’s lover because he loves Ralph, and has learned to stop feeling guilty about loving him in an emotional and sexual way. Laurie is Ralph’s lover because he has finally found some compassion for himself and his love for Ralph in a world and ethical system with very little compassion for queer people. Oh, and because he knows how Ralph likes his toast and Ralph knows how he likes his tea~ (that was a long rant but ranting at other academic papers is something they train you to do in grad school lol)
In summary, if we read the novel as a critique of the platonic model of love as it is presented in the Phaedrus, then the ending is a classic bittersweet coming-of-age realization that the world is not black-and-white, books and the ideal lives they present don’t hold all the answers to the complexity of life’s questions. The protagonist has to become a “maker of his own maps” and forge his own path ahead. I think the ending sets up Ralph as the lover who will accompany Laurie on the rest of the difficult road ahead. Of course anything could theoretically still happen after the end, but the ending itself leaves our protagonist with his lover in a state of peace, with the knowledge that they will have to face the challenges of their relationship together the next morning. But the loneliness lengthened by their strife has shown that they need each other, need to be reconciled with each other, in order to achieve even one night’s rest.
file -> phrases that are going to shift something in me forever
Dock Motif - Scott Lloyd Anderson
American , b. 1958 -
Oil on panel , 16 x 12 in.
Actually genuinenly enjoying my customer service job sometimes
Customer (calling from Ireland): “Yes hello, I would like to -”
Sheep in the background: *gentle baa*
Customer: “Uh, sorry, what I want to do is -”
Sheep: *slightly more insistent baa*
Customer: “No, not now! -cough- Excuse me. I have a reservation and -”
Sheep: *VERY LOUD ACCUSATORY BAA*
Customer: “Arnulf! Please be quiet, I am on the phone! … Sorry, I sincerely apologize on behalf of Arnulf.”
me: “I love and forgive him.”
Customer: “Don’t, he doesn’t deserve it. Anyway, I’m calling about -”
Arnulf: *small, very self-satisfied baa*
I still love this lol
It’s ruining my notes dude :’D