J. Howell Russell (English, ?)
will byers stan first human second
d e v o n
I'd rather be in outer space đ¸

â
Xuebing Du

Love Begins

romaâ
sheepfilms
Three Goblin Art
Game of Thrones Daily

çĽćĽ / Permanent Vacation
AnasAbdin
noise dept.
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
No title available
trying on a metaphor
TVSTRANGERTHINGS

Product Placement
occasionally subtle

⣠Chile in a Photography âŁ
seen from Germany
seen from Indonesia

seen from Malaysia

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Brunei
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Hong Kong SAR China
seen from Germany

seen from Vietnam

seen from TĂźrkiye
seen from Germany

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Malaysia

seen from United States
seen from Sweden

seen from Colombia

seen from Germany
@madebymaryssa
J. Howell Russell (English, ?)
thinking about diatoms again
microscopic living stars made of glass that eat the sun. and they're all around us. in every body of water. glass sun-eating stars.
I like them a lot. they produce up to half of all earth's oxygen. the air you breathe is thanks to sun-eating stars made of glass. and that's pretty cool.
and you know. like oblongs and triangles and some other bullshit
[overlapping bumpers stickers on a red car]
Remember
(HONK) if you HONK all you
(if anything) at me I will HONK HONK
if you get any closer u have to
HONK if (if you will) if (I HONK myself) want
HONK if you have ever been
personally victimized by HONK
[/end transcript]
If a fantasy world has an ancient tree of wisdom, that means it must also have young trees that are dumb as shit. Just giving terrible advice like, "the evil wizard is kinda hot"'
Hot take: there is no valid reason that official government ID should have either a sec or gender marker on it. First name, last name, dob + up to date image will suffice. Address, if relevant.
Y'all know it's crucial to paramedics, right?
Any of my followers who are paramedics/first responders/emergency room staff want to attest that no, it isn't.
What do you think happens in dire medical emergencies where an unconscious person presents and doesn't have ID on their person at the time?
I'm always confused by why people seem to think that there is some sort of Penis Emergency that will kill you if paramedics perform the Vagina Procedure on your fully clothed body.
Hospital spoilers btw: blood isn't sorted by sex, it's sorted by type. The sex of the blood donor doesn't factor in at all when receiving a transfusion, and you will not be harmed by receiving blood from a donor whose sex is different than yours. Saying this because it's another misconception that I've heard.
if you're unconscious at the hospital and they need to operate and insert a catheter in your urethra, don't worry! they'll figure out if you have a penis or a vagina without having to look at a laminated card in your wallet
And if you have ambiguous or surgically modified genitals, they'll find your urethra anyway!
I think this is one of those things where folks are so used to it that they just sort of assume there must be a good reason for it. But the only reason for your sex to be on your ID is if your legal rights differ based on your sex. Like, it would be important for your ID to say F or M if, for instance, one of those categories was allowed to open a bank account but the other one wasn't. But as far as I can tell, we have mostly decided that legal rights should pertain to everyone. Which means that sex documentation really is just a throwback to a time when women were not considered full legal persons and therefore their legal status had to be officially displayed on their ID in order to maintain that distinction.
Honestly, the only major thing I can think of that still strictly legally requires sex distinction is the military draft. Which, A) still doesn't require sex be recorded on your drivers license, B) could be made sex-neutral, or C) could be abolished instead.
Most ID didnât have gender markers until the 1970s - post dating many (not all) gendered finance decisions etc - and while thereâs a lot of stories about /why/ I donât think any of them are particularly well substantiated (no, I donât think itâs David Bowieâs fault specifically). There is no good reason or purpose for gender markers on ID
Incidentally the one sex related thing that IS important to paramedics and guides your care is âare you pregnantâ and I can assure you from personal experience they donât need that written down
[credited to J. Rolf Halta]
It's wild how we absolve the 9-to-5 of all guilt. The damage is systematically rebranded as your personal failing.
Got fat? It's not that jobs require 10 hours at a desk, it's your "sedentary lifestyle".
Ruined eyes? It's not the workflow, it's your "screen time".
Feel empty? It's not the grind, it's just "adulthood".
The job causes the problem, but you take the blame. The 9-to-5 is treated as some unchangeable default of nature we all must bow to.
[/end transcript]
Yeah okay Ill reblog that!
Not a scholar at first, but the guy who wrote Jaws hated that people used it to justify hating sharks so much he dedicated the rest of his life to shark research and advocacy.
The woman who popularized gender reveals wishes she hadn't, afaik.
(afaik- the woman who popularized gender reveals did so because she had a long history of miscarriages. The reveal was a celebration of the fact that one of her pregnancies had gotten far enough that there WAS a physical sex to reveal. It was never intended to be like... *gestures at modern gender reveals* all that. That same kid later came out as trans and yes, the family had a second gender reveal for that lol.)
This whole thread is so beautiful to me that I can explain it
the way ozempic has finally made the fact that eating healthy and exercising doesn't necessarily make you thin well known and society's reaction to this is not "oh i guess being thin or fat doesn't actually show if you're healthy" but "oh i guess everyone should be on this drug"
I hate that this is infact how ozempic is viewed now because I watched, in real time, how my mothers diabetes got significantly better on ozempic, she didn't start it for weight loss, infact she started it before it even got big for weight loss, but all people can talk about is the weight loss on ozempic and not how good it is as a diabetes medication. Watching my mom find energy and happiness because for once a drug wasn't making her lethargic and miserable was wonderful, she was able to feel better, but then it was spouted as this miracle weight loss drug, and suddenly she just couldn't access it anymore at a good price. Not only has the ozempidemic made fatphobia normal in an already fatphobic society but it's making it harder to access for people who genuinely need it because it's seen as a luxury cosmetic drug.
As someone who has overcome substance abuse, I find this decadeâs framing of addiction incredibly insulting.
Somewhere along the line, we decided that any repeated behavior, any source of pleasure, any coping mechanism, any habit that isnât monk-like and productivity-optimized must be labeled an addiction. You like scrolling art before you create? Addiction. You watch comfort shows after work? Addiction. You check your phone in line at the grocery store? Addiction. You drink coffee with breakfast? Addiction. The word has been stretched so thin it barely means anything anymore, except âa behavior I personally disapprove of.â
Addiction is not âI enjoy stimulation.â It is not âI have habits.â It is not âI seek input before I produce output.â Addiction is a specific, devastating pattern of compulsion, harm, loss of control, and often self-destruction. It dismantles relationships. It corrodes trust. It hijacks the reward system so thoroughly that survival itself becomes secondary. It is not equivalent to liking Pinterest boards or needing music to focus.
When everything becomes addiction, nothing is. The language gets diluted, and with it, the gravity of what actual addiction is. People who have clawed their way out of substance abuse know the difference between compulsion and preference, between destructive dependence and deliberate engagement. Collapsing those distinctions into a trendy moral panic about âdopamineâ is not enlightened. Itâs sloppy. Unserious, even.
Thereâs also something deeply puritanical about it. The 2020s seem obsessed with pathologizing pleasure. If something feels good, it must be suspect. If it captures your attention, it must be hijacking your brain. If it isnât explicitly productive, it must be rot. Weâve replaced older moral frameworks with neuroscience-flavored shame, but the tone is the same: you are wrong for enjoying things.
What bothers me most is how casually the word is thrown around in creative spaces. If you gather inspiration through music, images, movement, conversation, suddenly youâre âstimulus addicted.â If you canât brute-force a novel in a silent white room with no input, you lack discipline. Never mind that many artists throughout history have relied on immersion, community, environment, and cross-media inspiration. Now itâs framed as weakness, as though the only legitimate art is produced under self-imposed sensory austerity.
This framing flattens nuance. There is a difference between avoidance and incubation. There is a difference between doomscrolling to numb out and deliberately engaging with material that fuels your imagination. There is a difference between compulsively chasing a hit and consciously choosing input that enriches your work. But nuance doesnât trend. Alarmism does.
Thereâs also a strange individualizing move happening here. Instead of asking why people are exhausted, overstimulated, underpaid, isolated, or burnt out, we zoom in on their coping mechanisms and label them addictions. Instead of examining structural monotony, economic precarity, and social fragmentation, we scold individuals for having âbad dopamine habits.â Itâs easier to diagnose peopleâs scrolling than to confront the conditions that make endless scrolling appealing.
Calling everything an addiction also erases agency. It suggests that people are perpetually hijacked by their brains, incapable of intentional choice unless they purge all sources of easy stimulation. Thatâs not empowering. Itâs infantilizing. Adults are capable of enjoying things without being enslaved by them. Adults can have rituals, comforts, and creative processes without it being pathology.
When I hear the word âaddictionâ tossed around to describe normal human behavior, it doesnât sound like insight. It sounds like moral grandstanding dressed up in pop psychology. And for those of us who have actually lived through the wreckage of substance abuse and fought to reclaim control, it feels like watching something serious get turned into a meme.
We deserve better language. We deserve distinctions. We deserve a culture that can tell the difference between compulsion and preference, between harm and habit, between numbing out and nourishing ourselves. Not everything that holds our attention is a disorder. Not everything pleasurable is a vice. And not everything repetitive is an addiction.
I am giving this post a FAQ (of sorts - the "Q" there is very charitable considering these are more like "whatabouts" and "gotchas" than actual questions) because it has been the bane of my online existence ever since it broke containment, and yet I don't want to disable reblogs because I still think the message is important and I want people to continue seeing it.
"But caffeine IS addictive, though!!!"
I never even said the word "caffeine" in this post. I said "coffee." Decaf exists. Don't talk to me about the trace amounts of caffeine in decaf, either, I already know about them. They are not enough for an average adult nervous system to respond to, and that's not the point anyway. The point is, yes, caffeine causes physical dependency, but so do blood pressure regulating meds, corticosteroids, and virtually everything you might get prescribed by a psychiatrist. The point is also "find me somebody who would rather end up homeless or sell their friends/family's valuables than go a couple days without a latte and then we can talk."
"But my friend/SO/family member is addicted to their phone!!! They ignore me to use it!!!"
If you're feeling ignored, that is on you to talk to them about it and set boundaries. You may also want to consider the possibility that you are boring.
"But I'M addicted to my phone. I know this because I end up using it all day and I feel happy when I'm doing it but then I feel bad later. Also, you are probably also addicted to your phone - try not using it for a week and see how you feel."
This is still not addiction. This is having trouble with task transitioning/initiation, avoiding something difficult, "FOMO", struggling to trust that other activities will have as reliable of a return on investment, missing your own emotional cues that tell you when you're getting bored, living in a society where most things require use of a phone, any combination of the above, and/or probably also some other shit I can't think of right now.
I am an app-based independent contractor and if I did that on a whim, I would wreck my finances. But that's so cool how you're apparently so concerned about my well-being!
*unprompted during a first date* Its interesting donât you think? Purityâs value lies in its potential defilement
(flirting) I could worship you in ways that would make churches look useless.
too many stories about turning yourself into a monster as a metaphor for pretending to be something you aren't and losing yourself in the process. not enough stories about turning yourself into a monster as a metaphor for choosing to openly embrace yourself even if it's strange to other people
I have heard fisher catsâ vocalizations being described as screams or cries of kids or children⌠but I never understood exactly how uncanny their actual sounds are!
These are lynx! fisher cats arenât even cats they are a large weasel
These are lynx! fisher
cats arenât even cats they
are a large weasel
Beep boop! I look for accidental haiku posts. Sometimes I mess up.
better pictures of my papier mache cat i made when i was 17 (its cat-sized)
Holy shit, there are talented people out there â¤ď¸â¤ď¸â¤ď¸
Dogs are machines that turn normal toys into wet yucky toys