art blog(derogatory)
YOU ARE THE REASON
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
taylor price
we're not kids anymore.
Sade Olutola
Keni

Product Placement

shark vs the universe
hello vonnie
almost home
Misplaced Lens Cap

JVL
Claire Keane
šŖ¼
tumblr dot com
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
$LAYYYTER
Not today Justin
No title available

seen from Malaysia

seen from China
seen from United States

seen from Indonesia

seen from Netherlands
seen from Germany

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Australia
seen from United States

seen from Singapore
seen from Germany

seen from United States

seen from Russia

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from Saudi Arabia

seen from Indonesia
@metatextual-meme
ā So you want to learn pixel art? ā
š¹ Part 1 of ??? - The Basics!
Edit: Now available in Google Doc format if you don't have a Tumblr account š„°
Hello, my name is Tofu and I'm a professional pixel artist. I have been supporting myself with freelance pixel art since 2020, when I was let go from my job during the pandemic.
My progress, from 2017 to 2024. IMO the only thing that really matters is time and effort, not some kind of natural talent for art.
This guide will not be comprehensive, as nobody should be expected to read allat. Instead I will lean heavily on my own experience, and share what worked for me, so take everything with a grain of salt. This is a guide, not a tutorial. Cheers!
Trans activist Jamison Green's passport photos before and after HRT. Left he's age 32 (1980) Right age 41 (1989) after being on testosterone for one year (x)
(read his autobiography here for free)
updated the link to his autobiography because it was broken! here's some more pictures of him (first is mid 90s, second 2013 and last 2024)
there's an interview with him from 2017 along with some information about his life and activism. and he was interviewed on a podcast here. he's not super well known but has been a really important trans activist for decades
"going out to get milk" is a common turn of phrase used to describe a man abandoning his family.
the "milkman" is a common figure in stories depicting a woman's infidelity and adulterous affair.
this implies that the ability to provide milk would both decrease the likelihood of a man abandoning his wife and children, as it would eliminate the need for leaving to get milk AND would secure that man's marriage, as his wife would have no need to seek milk from an extraneous source.
therefore, all men should produce milk, through various means such as:
- being a cow
- being an almond
- being a woman
- being a coconut
- being in the omegaverse
- being an oat
(list is exemplary and not finite)
in this essay, i will redefine the nuclear family and explain the seductive and inflammatory nature of the 1993 "Got Milk?" commercials.
I didnāt even know I was attending your TedTalkš„š«
Yesā¤ļøš
Ophelia Hall Roommate Agreement
This is super strange but Netflix released two versions of the agreement and they're slightly different from each other.
In the now deleted Netflix House instagram post the agreement looks like this:
But on the Netflix House Facebook account the post is still live (at the time of writing) and it looks like this:
The main thing that stands out is that this sentence, "Neither roommate is required to admit they care about the other," is no longer a footnote and is instead listed with the rest of the rules.
Not only that, but Wednesday herself, using the black pen, has underlined the part that says "they care about the other."
Interesting choice ... not very subtle, Wednesday.
Once again Miss Nonchalance is outed as a fake idgaf-er by herself. You just know Enid would notice too.
Plus, I completely forgot to comment on the Bi Pride colours next to Enid's name in my first post, but you know I'm going to point them out this time!
The closet is truly made of glass.
š¤¦š»āāļøā¤ļøšš³ļøāā§ļøš„
#HappyPride #Iguess??? #NetflixIsThatClosetedGayWhoWorriesAboutPeopleFindingOutš¤·š»āāļø
The One Who Ran Away / The One Left Behind
aegis spoilers below
SUCH a good mid season finale iām in love!! thirteenās fear over yaz killed me and the sheer RELIEF in her voice when she got her back ugh my heart
also the motif of you have to trust people even when everything tells you not to is so funny bc doctor my love. are you HEARING yourself
i loved how yaz was written in this episode, her saving the tourist even after it took her over was so BEAUTIFUL and speaks to the core of yaz and why i love her so much sheās so KIND and always tries to save everyone and i love that that was highlighted
"It's no loss, you'll be alright..."
ā¤ļøšššš„
this is a known fact for anyone who watched the show but it's nice to insist further upon it thank you chibbies
ā¤ļøšššš„
I just watched The Devil Wears Prada for the first time, and I think a lot of people misunderstood the ending. Andy wasnāt choosing her boyfriend or her friends. She was choosing herself. She realised that she could chase ambition without losing integrity, and that success means nothing if you canāt recognise the person in the mirror.
And Miranda? I donāt think sheās the villain so many people paint her as. Sheās complex. She is cold when she needs to be, but deeply human underneath all the control. The reason Andy affected her so deeply is because Miranda sees herself in her. Not the hardened parts she shows the world, or even says to Andy herself, but the parts she buried long ago. In the film we see her crying to Andy reflecting this, this side of her that longs for family and softness.
Mirandaās story is what happens when a woman is forced to choose strength every single day just to survive in a world that punishes her for having it. She didnāt become ruthless because she wanted to but because she had to. Every cutting remark, every impossible demand itās like an armor for her. A woman having success in a manās world.
When she looks at Andy, she sees the woman she once was before the armor. Thatās why their dynamic hurts so much because Miranda isnāt trying to destroy Andy, sheās almost testing her. Sheās asking, Can you do what I did? Can you become hard like me? It was almost a challenge.
By walking away though, Andy answers that question. She chooses to keep her softness, her empathy, her sense of self. The same things Miranda had to sacrifice. Thatās not a rejection of ambition but a reclaiming of identity.
I think Andy showed her the light again. The soft part of her she buried long ago. And somewhere inside her, I think Miranda respects her for that. She calls her new job after all to help her. She even smiles at her by the end. I also think Miranda showed Andy how to be more confident and ruthless by the end. (Less of a shell of a person).
Overall I really enjoyed the film but I wish people had a bit better critical analysis when looking at the ending. Itās easy to stamp onto it, Andy choosing a man, but why make this film about men. It was never about them. Itās about femininity. About women and power. About how women navigate ambition, expectation, and identity in spaces that constantly demand they prove worth. Andyās journey isnāt about rejecting success but about redefining what success means for her.
ā¤ļøšš„
Itās Pride Month Eve, so leave out some milk for Freddie Mercury and his cats.
Time for the annual Pride Month reblog of Freddie Mercury and his fabulous cats!
ā¤ļøššøš±
Hey maybe you guys should stop writing for the Addams family cause you don't get them at all.
Imagine my girl Morticia saying that shit in any other portrayal? NO? Because she wouldn't.
I really love Jenna Ortega as Wednesday
And when she's given good material to work with I love Catherine Zeta Jones as Morticia
but this show really does not seem to get the dynamic of the Addams Family as a whole like it just does not seem to grasp what their deal is as a family
The problem with Netflix's Wednesday is that one of the main things about the Addams Family is that they are counter cultural. Specifically counter to cishet, white, American, suburban norms.
Part of that is being the opposite of the shitty sitcom family where the wife is a nag, the husband is an idiot, the mother-in-law sucks, and no one seems to like each other very much. The Addamses actually love each other. There's no 'take my wife' bs. If Gomez calls Morticia a battle-axe or the ol' ball and chain he means it to be highly complimentary. There's none of the nonsense like in the pics OP posted. Gomez or Morticia lives with their mother in law (it depends on which version whose mother she is) who is literally a witch (geddit, 'my mother-in-law is such a witch...') and get on great. They genuinely and openly support, love, and care for each other through thick and thin.
But the biggest problem that Netflix's Wednesday has is that to make a really good Addams show rn would mean scrapping the Sabrina the Darksided Witch/boarding school Monster High concept, going back to basics, and having them live next to an upper-middle class, conservative values, MAGA family and letting their differences fuel the plot.
A really good Addams Family show would have Morticia fighting against book bans at the school and having hilarious misunderstandings about what her neighbour means about "Liberal witch hunts." It would celebrate queerness, and gender (and species) non-conformity because the Addamses are queer and gender non-conforming, and not always definitely human (Cousin Itt, for example). You know Fester's gender identity is probably something like 'an abomination.' If one of them gets asked, "What are you?" the answer is a prompt, "An Addams."
They would be fighting for co-ed sports so Wednesday can trounce a boy at fencing, and would find out her chromosomes are just 'spooky' or something.
There'd be an episode about immigration and being targeted by ICE. OFC several Addamses come from somewhere weird and arrived in the USA via broomstick, or tunneling from some underground community of cryptids, or other hilarious misadventure. Gomez would desperately want to be blackbagged and treated like a dangerous animal (cue a major flirting moment between him and Morticia). They would permanently scare ICE out of the town.
Wednesday would fiercely support Landback. Pugsley would get redpilled and learn a lesson real quick. Gomez would get into (and out of) Crypto, and Morticia would have run-ins with MLM 'huns.' They would advocate for freedom of religion. Granny would rally alongside Evangelicals to have religion in school, only to reveal she meant witchcraft. They would support UBI, and be anti-landlord. Easy episode idea: Gomez is a landlord and goes on a spiral about it ("But, Gomez, you love leeches and scum" "Not this kind! Morticia, they've painted everything white, in my name!!!" "No!") and they wind up in a battle with the town because he wants to unburden himself of this shame and the town wants to stop free community-owned housing.
The point is that Netflix isn't going to touch any of that with a ten foot pole. They don't want to; that's way too political for them. Instead, they made this wildly unrelated supernatural teen drama that has nothing to do with the original concept or world that the Addams Family exists in (they're outsiders in the real world, that's the point).
And, worse, Netflix's Wednesday actively goes against the original themes by being vaguely conservative in its values.
Netflix's Wednesday fails the assignment so bad I'd laugh, if it wasn't so disappointing and enraging. Just take a look at what the Mary Sue had to say about the whole "werewolf conversion camp" debacle for a microcosm of the many things wrong with this show.
"It wants to use hot-button topics like conversion therapy and colonization but it doesnāt understand how to work them into the metaphor. In fact, it barely knows how to work with the basic metaphor of āmonstersā and how they function in the horror genre in general. In storytelling, the monster or the freak has always been the stand-in for the societal outcast. For the person who canāt be controlled by the dictates of polite society. They are the subtext for the outcast. But Wednesday makes the subtext text by literally splitting the characters into āoutcastsā and ānormies.ā And yet the outcasts, the monsters and freaks who live on the fringe, are also the privileged and elite."
In my opinion, Netflix's Wednesday is wholly unworthy of the Addams name and is an outright blight on the franchise.
A script note from the writer of The Addams Family (1991), someone who understood the assignment:
I like the show and actors in a general sense, but I do agree that the whole thing is very different to the best interpretation of The Addams Family.
The 90s movies were probably the closest to what it should be.
The children of the forest carving a face in a weirwood tree by Chase Stone
A Psalm of Stone - Travels Around Avebury (Part One)
1Ā In 1977, ITV first broadcast a childrenās TV drama ā produced by HTV ā called āChildren of the Stones.ā Set in the Neolithic village of āMilbury,ā it told a tale of events that cycled throughout history, the mysterious powers that manifested inside the stone circle and the fates of the villagers that lived within said circle and came into contact with the Lord of the Manor.Ā As anā¦
View On WordPress
A Victoria Day Special of the āGarden vs Jungleā Trope: A Narrative of Betrayal and the Legislative Gap
Author's Note:
This article is part of an ongoing series excerpted and adapted from my upcoming book, The Illiberal Turn, which examines the quiet erosion of the Rule of Law, the rise of state indifference, and the normalization of coercive tactics within modern liberal democracies. Alok Mukherjee
I am writing this because I need to tell you a storyānot as a researcher, a retired professional, or a former chair of a police board, but as a person who was, for a few hours on a quiet holiday, completely stripped of his agency.
Victoria Day, May 23, 2022. It was a beautiful afternoon. My wife, Arun, and I were at home. I was engaged in the "epistemic commons"āthe simple, democratic act of seeking information. I was looking into weather patterns in eastern Ontario, clicking through local community papers. Then, the silence of our living room was shattered. My computer screen turned blood-red, and a siren-like alarm erupted from the speakers. A message flashed: "TROJAN VIRUS DETECTED. DO NOT SHUT DOWN." Along with it, a phone number flashed with a message to call immediately. My computer had frozen completely. I executed a force quit, but when I restarted after 30 seconds, the message was still flashing with the same piercing sound and glaring color. I panicked; I took the āalertā seriously.
The Architecture of Isolation: Olivia and the Security Gambit
In that moment of sensory overload and mental paralysis, I called the number for "Microsoft Security" on the screen. Despite years at the helm of Canadaās largest municipal police serviceās governing body, the sensory invasion had overwhelmed me completely. "Olivia" answered my call. She was calm and terrifying. She claimed my entire identity was being "leaked" to hackers in real-time.
Then came the first act of isolation. Olivia told us that the hackers were eavesdropping through our cell phones, cordless phones, and smart TV. "For your safety," she said, "you must turn them all off immediately." We obeyed. In that instant, our home became a silent island. Once the isolation was complete, Olivia "transferred" me via a "secure line" to the Fraud Department at my bank to intercept an unauthorized wire transfer.
The Puppeteer: Catherine and the Loss of Agency
That was when I met "Catherine." She stayed on an open line with me for several hours, a constant voice in my ear. She told me $10,000 was being funneled to a "Chinese porn site" and that we had a three-hour window to "intercept" it.
The solution she offered was a bizarre ritual of "encrypted duplicate charges." She directed me to drive to multiple stores to buy thousands of dollars in gift cards. At the time, with Catherineās solicitous voiceāasking if I was hydrated, expressing concern because I "sounded tired"āit felt like a rescue mission. I was no longer an actor in my own life; I had been converted into a "tool" of the defrauding entity. My arm, holding the credit card, was merely an extension of Catherineās will.
My faculties of reason and judgment deactivated, I was an automaton, doing Catherineās bidding mutely. I went from store to store, with her on an open line instructing me, charging thousands of dollars worth of gift cards from Google and Microsoft to my credit card, determined to beat the clock. At the end of the day, I had managed to buy cards worth $6,000. Out of mock concern for my age and my demonstration of āgood faith,ā Catherine, in consultation with her supervisor, relented. I could go home now and take care of the remaining $4,000 first thing the next morning. What we had already provided, she assured me, was sufficient for the bank to delay clearing the charge from the Chinese porn site.
I bought it totally. The task now was to go home and fax Catherine the hundreds of cards in batches. To this day, I have copies of the gift cards and the fax numbers on my system like a permanent wound. We didn't "wake up" until the silence finally returned that evening after the whole process was over. The next morning, when Catherine called back seeking the remaining $4,000, the "victim" died and the "researcher" returned. I didn't take the calls. I called the police.
The Wall of Indifference: A Systemic Failure
While Google eventually canceled its cards, Microsoftāwhose name was the baitāremained an unreachable ghost. Then there was American Express. I fought them through three grueling stages of appeals. Each time, the rejection was identical: "You tapped the card. You authorized the charge."
I do not blame AMEX for guarding its interests. The problem is the law. Our framework has no understanding of "disabling effects." It fails to recognize that psychological control is just as coercive as a physical threat. This is precisely where these cybercriminals launch their attack. They gain control over the mind and body of their targets by disabling the rational, logical faculties. Yet, the law treats these targets as fully autonomous, rational beings. Financial institutions like AMEX and my bank make their decisions entirely in the shadow of this flawed law.
The Global Shadow Industry & The Cost of Inaction
This is not a story about a single victim in Toronto. It is a story about a global growth industry that is looting the "epistemic commons." In 2025 alone, Canadians lost over $700 million to these predatorsāa figure that represents only 5-10% of the true harm, as most victims remain silent out of embarrassment.
As someone who spent over a decade in police governance, the response from the Toronto Police was the most galling. I was told that because the theft exceeded $5,000, it fell into a "jurisdictional black hole." Contrast this with the millions invested in technical resources to monitor "national security" or political dissent.
A police sergeant did visit our home, heard me out, and completely understood what had happened. Clearly, this was familiar to him. He gave me a complaint file number and asked me to go to our neighborhood police station to file a report, promising that the Fraud Squad would take over.
Well, it didnāt happen. The officer at the front office of my local police division knew who I was but refused to take a report. He claimed that was the job of another officer who was unavailable. He then proceeded to tell me that nothing would actually happen, and no one will come to speak to me. Why? Because the police agency only investigates frauds over $50,000. I protested, noting that being over $5,000, our loss meets the legal definition of an indictable offense. He agreed but callously told me I should be "thankful" to have gotten away with losing only a few thousand dollars.
This was shocking and sickening. During my tenure as Chair of the Toronto Police Services Board and President of the Canadian Association for Police Governance, I had consistently advocated for the dedication of police resources to cybercrime as a predatory āgrowth industry.ā And now, here I was.
The Philosophy of the Jungle vs. The Garden
This institutional retreat is often justified by a pervasive and troubling metaphor currently circulating in Western foreign policy circlesāthe trope of the "Garden and the Jungle." Promoted by figures like Robert Kagan, one of the gurus of neo-conservatism in the US, and Josep Borrell, the former head of foreign affairs for the European Union, this view suggests that the "Rule of Law" is a fragile garden that must be protected from an encroaching, chaotic "jungle" through any means necessary.
The irony is that when I sought protection, I found that the State had essentially abandoned its gardening duties for the elderly and the vulnerable. By treating digital fraud as an inevitable, unmanageable part of the "jungle," the State justifies its own inertia. It allows the digital public square to remain a wilderness where predators roam free, while it meticulously "gardens" and polices the political activities and dissent of its own citizens. Where is the police for those of us living within the supposed safety of the garden?
The Legislative Pivot: Bill C-15 and What Remains
Since my experience, the landscape in Canada has begun to shift somewhat. In March 2026, Bill C-15 received Royal Assent, bringing the first significant amendments to Canadaās Bank Act in years. The government has finally admitted that the old system was indefensible.
These changes are a hard-won victory for consumer advocacy, but they still contain a dangerous lacuna. While the new legislation strengthens protections against "unauthorized access" (hacking), it remains murky on "coerced authorization" (scams) such as what I experienced. Does the law recognize the "Puppeteer Effect"? Or does it still allow financial institutions to wash their hands of a client even when they were psychologically manipulated into "tapping the card"?
Conclusion: Reclaiming the Social Contract
We are living through an "Illiberal Turn" where the state possesses the power to surveil us but lacks the will to protect us from digital looting. If "authorization" can be manufactured by a voice on a "secure line," then our current definition of consent is a lie. It is time we stop blaming the "scammed" and start demanding a social contract that protects the security of the person as fiercely as it protects the security of the transaction. We must demand that the "garden" of our laws actually covers the people living within its walls.
I have narrated a story from Canada. I have no doubt that similar home and psychological invasions are being perpetrated by multinational cybercriminals all over the world. They pose a challenge that calls for a coordinated, dedicated global response by states, police agencies, and financial institutions. We have āInterpolā; why not a āCyberpolā?
The Lingering Aftermath
Four years after it happened, the incident has left a permanent impact on our reaction to calls on our cell phones and landlines, as well as text messages and emails from anonymous or unknown sources. These are a daily occurrence. We are constantly targeted by entities masquerading as āFedExā or various banks. We no longer answer our phones if the number is unknown to us or not displayed. These numbers are blocked; suspicious-looking text and email messages are marked as junk.
But this is a highly unsatisfactory response. As our family is scattered across the globe, we must answer calls when the area code matches countries where we have loved ones. Every time we do so, our heart rate goes up. As for the calls that go unanswered, it means we are paying for services that we can now use only partially. Thus, despite all the vaunted 5G connectivity, we are far less connected than we used to be when communication technology was less advanced.
Clearly, those who maintain this āgardenā ā the government, the communications and cyber behemoths, the regulators, and the enforcement agencies ā have a lot of work to do to deserve this pastoral nomenclature.
Join the Conversation
The nervousness and vulnerability many of us feel in the digital public square often go unspoken out of embarrassment or a sense of helplessness. If you or a loved one have experienced a similar digital invasion, or if you have found yourself trapped in the jurisdictional gaps of our legal and policing systems, please share your thoughts and experiences in the comments below. By breaking the silence, we can begin to collectively demand the protection we deserve. And please - give me your support and encouragement. Subscribe to my blogs. Like them. Comment on the them and join the conversation. Share them.
Source: A Victoria Day Special of the āGarden vs Jungleā Trope: A Narrative of Betrayal and the Legislative Gap
Children of the Stones Review
Mia Brake (India Brown) moves to Milbury so her father can study standing stones. Only other kids can see how weird the village is, but even
Have you heard of this hit 1970s tv show? Itās kind of corny now, but itās lasted pretty well! (Your parents might have loved it). Also, the BBC produced a podcast adaptation!