Those were 2.20 minutes well spent!
highlights
Congrats
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
Today's Document
Mike Driver

No title available
DEAR READER
Xuebing Du
dirt enthusiast
NASA
YOU ARE THE REASON
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
No title available
AnasAbdin
$LAYYYTER

pixel skylines

Love Begins
One Nice Bug Per Day
almost home
Sade Olutola
wallacepolsom

tannertan36

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Canada

seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Türkiye

seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Bulgaria

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Malta

seen from United States

seen from Türkiye

seen from United States
seen from Türkiye

seen from Spain
seen from United States
@isjomeru
Those were 2.20 minutes well spent!
highlights
Congrats
i see a frightening amount of ads for Scientology on youtube and i just wanna make sure everyone knows how dangerous it is. it’s not some misunderstood religion, it really is a dangerous cult and a scam. they will bleed you dry of your money and harass you to no end, do not give them your money or any information they can and will destroy you financially and psychologically
scene before movie climax:
protagonist: So who’s with me?
*5 seconds of silence*
the stoic one: *looks up* im in
4 people one after the other: me to
*after everyone else has joined we see The Edgy One standing in the back*
*2 more seconds of silence*
The Edgy One: *chortles* we’re all gonna die… what the hell, im in
My favorite movie.
What Your Favorite My Hero Academia Ship Says About You
Transcription below the cut
Keep reading
In case you aren’t familiar, Michael Scott Moore and David Rohde are both journalists. Moore was held by Somali pirates for 977 days. Rohde was held captive by the Taliban for 7 months after being abducted in Afghanistan.
for all you writers out there:
donjon has tons of generators. for calendars. for demographics of a country and city. for names (both fantastical and historical) of people, nations, magics, etc.
this site lets you generate/design a city, allowing you to choose size, if you want a river or coast, walls around it, a temple, a main keep, etc.
this twitter, uncharted atlas, tweets generated maps of fantasy regions every hour.
and vulgar allows you to create a language, based on linguistic and grammatical structures!!! go international phonetic alphabet!!!
holy shit marge
According to the CDC, in 10 percent of those drownings, the adult will actually watch the child do it, having no idea it is happening. Drowning does not look like drowning—Dr. Pia, in an article in the Coast Guard’s On Scene magazine, described the Instinctive Drowning Response like this:
“Except in rare circumstances, drowning people are physiologically unable to call out for help. The respiratory system was designed for breathing. Speech is the secondary or overlaid function. Breathing must be fulfilled before speech occurs.
Drowning people’s mouths alternately sink below and reappear above the surface of the water. The mouths of drowning people are not above the surface of the water long enough for them to exhale, inhale, and call out for help. When the drowning people’s mouths are above the surface, they exhale and inhale quickly as their mouths start to sink below the surface of the water.
Drowning people cannot wave for help. Nature instinctively forces them to extend their arms laterally and press down on the water’s surface. Pressing down on the surface of the water permits drowning people to leverage their bodies so they can lift their mouths out of the water to breathe.
Throughout the Instinctive Drowning Response, drowning people cannot voluntarily control their arm movements. Physiologically, drowning people who are struggling on the surface of the water cannot stop drowning and perform voluntary movements such as waving for help, moving toward a rescuer, or reaching out for a piece of rescue equipment.
From beginning to end of the Instinctive Drowning Response people’s bodies remain upright in the water, with no evidence of a supporting kick. Unless rescued by a trained lifeguard, these drowning people can only struggle on the surface of the water from 20 to 60 seconds before submersion occurs.”
This doesn’t mean that a person that is yelling for help and thrashing isn’t in real trouble—they are experiencing aquatic distress. Not always present before the Instinctive Drowning Response, aquatic distress doesn’t last long—but unlike true drowning, these victims can still assist in their own rescue. They can grab lifelines, throw rings, etc.
Look for these other signs of drowning when persons are in the water:
Head low in the water, mouth at water level
Head tilted back with mouth open
Eyes glassy and empty, unable to focus
Eyes closed
Hair over forehead or eyes
Not using legs—vertical
Hyperventilating or gasping
Trying to swim in a particular direction but not making headway
Trying to roll over on the back
Appear to be climbing an invisible ladder
So if a crew member falls overboard and everything looks OK—don’t be too sure. Sometimes the most common indication that someone is drowning is that they don’t look like they’re drowning. They may just look like they are treading water and looking up at the deck. One way to be sure? Ask them, “Are you all right?” If they can answer at all—they probably are. If they return a blank stare, you may have less than 30 seconds to get to them. And parents—children playing in the water make noise. When they get quiet, you get to them and find out why.
Source/article: [x]
Follow Ultrafacts for more facts!
BOOST FOR THE SUMMER. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE.
Can I just say thank you to OP for putting such a detailed description on this?
I’ve been a lifeguard for 6 years now and of all the saves I’ve done, maybe two or three had people drowning in the stereotypical thrashing style. And even those, like the save I made last weekend, it was exactly like OP describes where the person’s head is going in and out of the water but it isn’t long enough to get any air. Mostly you recognize drowning by the look on someone’s face. If someone looks wide eyed and terrified or confused, chances are they’re drowning. That look of “oh shit” is pretty easily recognizable. And even if you can’t tell for sure: GO AFTER THEM ANYWAY. I’ve done “saves” where a kid was pretending to drown and I mistook it for real drowning, but that’s preferable to a kid ACTUALLY drowning.
Also please remember that even strong swimmers can drown if they have a medical emergency, get cramps, or get too tired. If your friend knows how to swim but they’re acting funny get them to land. And even if someone can respond when you ask them if they need help, if they say they do need help? GO HELP THEM.
However . If the victim is a stranger, I can’t recommend trying to get them. Lifeguards literally train to escape “attacks,” because people who are drowning can freak the fuck out and grab you and make YOU drown as well. If you do go in after someone, take hold of them from the back and talk to them the whole time. IF YOU ARE GRABBED: duck down into the water as low as you can get. The person is panicking and won’t want to go under water and should release you. Shove up at their hands and push them away from you as you duck under. Don’t die trying to save someone else.
Please guys, read and memorize this post. Not all places have lifeguards. Being able to recognize drowning is such an important skill to have and you can save someone’s life.
Just incase!
For the people who are out there “fighting the good fight” and “trying to make fandom a better place,” I have two important questions for you:
1. Is the author dead? x
2. Is your baby in the bathwater? x
What do I mean by those things? Let’s start with #1. The Death of the Author is a type of literary criticism, the extreme cliff notes version of which is that art exists outside of the creator’s life, personal background, and even intentions. I’m using it slightly differently than Barthes intended, but that’s okay, because the author is dead and I’m interpreting his work through my own lens.
In fandom, the author is dead. In fact, the author was never alive in the first place, not really. The author has only ever been the idea of a person, because unlike published fiction, the only thing we know about a fanfic author is that which they choose to tell us about themselves.
Why is that important?
Because it might not be true. Hell, that happens in real life with published authors, who have SSN’s on file with their publishers, who pay taxes on the works they create and have researchable pasts. If the author of A Million Little Pieces could fake everything, why can’t I? Why can’t you? Why can’t the writer of your favorite fic in the whole wide world?
Stop me if you’ve heard this before: “you can only write about [sensitive subject] if [sensitive subject] has happened to you personally, otherwise you’re a disgusting monster that deserves to die!!” Or maybe “you can only write [x racial or ethnic group] characters if you’re [x racial or ethnic group] otherwise you’re racist/fetishizing/colonizing!”
You can play this game with any sensitive subject you can come up with. I’ve seen them all before, on a sliding scale of slightly chastising to literal death threats.
Now, I could tell you that I’m a white-passing Latina whose grandmother was an anchor baby. I could tell you that I speak only English because my family never taught me to speak Spanish, something which I’ve been told is common in the Cuban community, though I only know my own lived experience. I could tell you that I’m mostly neurotypical. I could tell you that I’m covered in surgical scars. I could tell you lots of things.
Are any of these true? Maybe! I could tell you that my brother has severe mental development problems, so uncommon that they’ve never been properly diagnosed, and that he will live the rest of his life in a group home with 24-hour care. Is that true? Am I allowed to write about families struggling with America’s piss-poor services for the handicapped now?
Am I allowed to write about being Cuban? After all, I did just say that I’m Cuban. But is it true? Can I instead write a character that’s Panamanian? Maybe I really am Panamanian, not Cuban. Maybe I’m both. Maybe I’m neither. Maybe I’m really French Canadian. Should we require people to post regular selfies? I can’t count the number of times I’ve had someone come up to me speaking Arabic, and I’ve been told that I look Syrian. What’s stopping me from making a blog that claims that I am Syrian? Can you even really tell someone’s race and ethnicity from a photo?
Am I allowed to write about being a teenager? Am I allowed to write about being a college student? Am I allowed to write about being an “adulty” adult? Can I write a character who’s 40? 50? 60? How old am I?
All of this is to say: you can’t base what someone is or is not “allowed” to write about on a background that may or may not be real. No matter how good your intentions. And I get it - this usually comes from a place of well-meaning. You’re trying to protect marginalized groups by stopping privileged people from trampling all over experiences that they haven’t suffered. I get that. It’s a very noble thought. But you can’t require a background check for every fic that you don’t like.
If you say “you can only write about rape if you’re a rape victim,” then one of three things will happen:
Real survivors will have to supply intimate details of their own violations to prevent harassment
Real survivors will refuse to engage and will then have to deal with death threats and people telling them to kill themselves for daring to write about their own experiences
People who aren’t survivors will say “yeah sure this happened to me” just to get people to shut up
Has that helped anyone? I mean really - anyone??
So now let’s get to point #2: is your baby in the bathwater?
If your intention is to protect marginalized people from being trampled upon, stop and assess if your boot is the one that’s now stamping on their face. Find your baby! Is your baby in the bathwater? Which is to say: find the goal that you’re advocating for. Now assess. Are you making the problem worse for the people you’re trying to protect? Does that rape victim really feel better, now that you’ve harassed and stalked them in the name of making rape victims feel safe?
Let’s say you read a fic that contains explicit sex between a 16 year old and a 17 year old. Is this okay? Would it be okay if the writer was 15? 16? 17? Should teenagers be barred from writing about their own lives, and should teenagers be banned from exploring sexuality in a fictional bubble, instead of hookup culture? Is it okay for a 20 year old to write about their experiences as a teenager? Is it okay for a 20 year old to write about being raped at a party as a teenager? Is it okay for a 30 year old? How about a 40 year old? Is it okay so long as it isn’t titillating? Is it okay if taking control of the narrative allows the writer to re-conceptualize their trauma as something they have control over? Is it okay if their therapist told them that writing is a safe creative outlet?
Is your author dead?
Is your baby in the bathwater?
Now let’s take a hardline approach: no fanfiction with characters who are under 18 years old. None. Is the 16 year old who really loves Harry Potter and wants to read/write about characters their own age better off? Should they be banned from writing? Should they be forced to exclusively read and write (adult) experiences that they haven’t lived? Will they write about teens anyway? Should they have to share it in secret? Should 16 year olds be ashamed of themselves? Should we just throw in with the evangelicals and say that the only answer is abstinence, both real and fictional?
Let’s say that no rape is allowed in fiction, at all. None. What happens to all the hurt/comfort fics where a character is raped and then receives the support and love that they deserve, slowly heal, and by the end have found themselves again? Are you helping rape victims by banning these stories? Are you helping rape victims by stripping their agency away, by telling them that their wants and their consent doesn’t matter?
Is your baby in the bathwater?
Fandom is currently being split in two: on one side, the people who want to make fandom a “safer” place by any means necessary, even if that means throwing out all of the marginalized groups they say they want to protect - and on the other, people who are saying “if you throw out that bathwater, you’re throwing the baby out too.”
The whole point of fandom is to be able to explore all kinds of ideas from the safety and comfort of a computer screen. You can read/write things that fascinate you, disgust you, titillate you, or make your heart feel warm. This is true of all fiction. People who want to read about rape and incest and extreme violence and torture can go pick up a copy of Game of Thrones from the bookstore whenever they want. Sanitizing fandom just means holding a community of people who are primarily not male, not straight, not cis, or some combination of those three, to higher and stricter standards than straight white cis male authors and creators all over the world.
There is nothing you can find on AO3 that you can’t find in a bookstore. Any teenager can go check out Lolita, or ASOIAF, or Flowers in the Attic, or Stephen King’s It, or Speak, or hundreds of other books that have adult themes or gratuitous violence or graphic sex. The difference is that AO3 has warnings and tags and allows people to interact only with the types of work that they want to, and allows people to curate their experiences.
Are these themes eligible to be explored, but only in the setting of something produced/published? Books, movies, television, studio art, music - all of these fields have huge barriers to entry, and they’re largely controlled by wealthy cishet white men. Is it better to say that only those who have the right connections to “make it” in these industries should be allowed to explore violence or sexuality or any other so-called “adult” theme?
Does banning women from writing MLM erotica make fan culture a better place?
Does banning queer people from writing about queer experiences make fan culture a better place?
Is M/M fic okay, but only if the author is male? What if he’s a transman? What if they’re NB? Who should get to draw those lines? Should TERFs get a vote? What if the author is a woman who feels more comfortable writing from a male character’s perspective because she’s grown up with male stories her whole life, or because she identifies more with male characters? What about all the transmen who discovered themselves, in part, by writing fanfiction, and realized that their desires to write male characters stemmed from something they hadn’t yet realized about themselves?
How can we ever be sure that the author is who they say they are?
Who is allowed to write these stories? How do we enforce it?
Is it better for none of these stories to ever exist at all?
Have you killed your author?
Have you thrown out your baby with the bathwater?
this post is AMAZING.
hey! bi people’s terms need more recognition!
doe: fem bi girl
stag: masc bi girl
tomcat: androgynous bi girl
mage: fem bi boy
knight: masc bi boy
druid: androgynous bi boy
dove: fem nonbinary bi
crow: masc nonbinary bi
pigeon: androgynous nonbinary bi
i’d like to nominate “being a twink who gets physically picked up by a man and loses the ability to think for a few minutes” to become an officially recognized emotion
i will die defending the idea that humans are not inherently evil and that its corrupt governments/corporations/establishments in society that are evil, not humanity as a whole. our species survival has always hinged on our ability to care about each other and to help one another, the violence of capitalism is not natural and humans are a hugely social species we NEED to make connections to keep living!!!! we need to make connections and interact with other people in order to thrive and touch starvation is an example of what happens when were denied these interactions. ancient humans took care of their disabled, elderly, and sick people because they cared about them. we have always cared and we always will and we need to keep nuturing that loving and caring nature that is within the whole human race
I’m sorry, I just can’t forget that Elizabeth Warren claimed to be Native American. I just can’t trust someone who reached that level of peak whiteness.
Her mother told her when she was younger that she was, she wrote an essay on her heritage for college based primarily on stories from her mother.
Last October she did release a report on a DNA analysis that was said to show a pure Native American ancestor appeared in her ancestry “in the range of six to 10 generations ago.”
All in all, they were able to conclude that she does have native american ancestry, not as much as initially believed, but nonetheless an adequate amount. We need to take another step forward and keep in mind that genetic testing/analysis for ancestry has only been possible in the last 10 years (three years for consumer markets). She wrote her paper in college, and believed her mother all of her life That is why she said that. Ancestry is a hard thing, especially prior to modern technologies as they were all based on stories being passed down to descendants ad nauseam, not on anything substantial like we have today.
Just have to add:
Elizabeth Warren DID NOT claim to be Native American. She reported that she had some Native American ancestry. Those are 2 very different things. She didn’t make a big deal out of it. Trump, otoh, did by calling her POCAHONTAS. Which one do you really think was behaving poorly?
It’s not like apologize was all she did:
She appeared at the National Indian Women Honor luncheon a few months ago to support a Native Leader from Massachusetts, who was winning an award, and she got a standing ovation.
She has also been working on legislation with Rep. Deb Haaland (New Mexico), the first Native American woman to serve in Congress that seeks to address funding shortfalls in tribal lands.
Even her critics admit she’s addressed the issue, to an extent, well:
Julian Brave Noisecat, a Native American journalist and activist who has criticized Warren previously, has said: “Based on my conversations with tribal leaders and advocates, the consensus position is that she’s one of the strongest allies of Indian country in Congress. She has good relationships with tribes across the board. And I think that’s relevant.”
Mr. Noisecat also said the ancestry matter had become double-edged: “More than any other Democratic presidential candidate, Ms. Warren has caused the most upset among Native American communities, but has also probably done the most outreach and is more vocal on issues that effect tribal citizens than other presidential candidates.”
María Urbina, the national political director of the progressive group Indivisible, said she and other liberal leaders were encouraged by Ms. Warren’s decision to apologize. Going forward, Ms. Urbina said she expected liberal activists to take their cues from Native leaders on whether Ms. Warren had adequately addressed their concerns.
“Native leaders and native people should be the ones to affirm — or not affirm — whether her record shows if she’s been an ally,” Ms. Urbina said. “That’s absolutely important.”
As we move forward towards the 2020 elections, just be careful about blinding following statements like OP makes. You guys remember those popular social-justice blogs which were Russian spies right? The one/two sentence denouements of Clinton, which sounded catchy and legit but in reality were trivial errors.
I mean, look at that. A short blurb discouraging you from trusting a Democratic candidate, coming from a deactivated account?