"Turning pictures of kids into child porn is YOUR right as an American!"
He's probably more worried about to $500K penalty per violation.
ojovivo
Mike Driver
d e v o n

tannertan36
TMBGareOK. The Official They Might Be Giants tumblr

#extradirty

pixel skylines
almost home
Color Me Curious
🪼
The Bowery Presents
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"

Andulka
Claire Keane
noise dept.
No title available

izzy's playlists!
Fai_Ryy
Misplaced Lens Cap

seen from Ukraine

seen from Bangladesh

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from France
seen from Iraq

seen from Netherlands

seen from France
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Spain
seen from Kazakhstan

seen from United States

seen from Uruguay
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Kosovo
seen from Pakistan
seen from Singapore
seen from Mozambique
seen from Malaysia
@moonglade-poetess
"Turning pictures of kids into child porn is YOUR right as an American!"
He's probably more worried about to $500K penalty per violation.
I feel like it hardly matters anymore, but Flock isn't the only unsecured intrusive data selling crime inventing AI hallucinating automated license plate reading mass surveillance camera operators. Axon and Motorola and Amazon and ALPR and CCTV and security cameras should be equally rejected. All surveillance must go.
There is no such thing as benign surveillance.
You are never monitored for your safety.
The binturongs of monitoring the situation
Tunisian woman’s cape, Tunisia, by jihen_t_m
Obsessed with these carved Quartz points
They just make sense symbols for Mani and plants
Centaur yuri
[woman who has never been gentle with herself voice] I just need to be more disciplined
A Love for Ignorance
Surprise! Scientifically described in 1898—and last spotted in 1913—the red-crested tree rat (Santamartamys rufodorsalis) was thought to be extinct for more than a century. That changed in 2011, when two observers in a Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta nature reserve in Colombia stumbled upon this critter. This long-whiskered rodent can grow up to 17 in (45.7 cm) long. It’s nocturnal and arboreal, though little is known about this species’ behavior. The red-crested tree rat is listed as Critically Endangered, due to loss of habitat.
Photo: ProAves Colombia, CC BY-SA 2.0, flickr
look i know the fascists don’t care and the anecdote is made up, but for anyone who isn’t aware:
the missing distinction is between personal property and private property.
in this fake anecdote the banana is personal property. if someone has a banana in their hand and you take it from them that is going to piss them off no matter what the political system is.
but what gorillas don’t have is the idea that a particular grove of bananas belongs to one particular gorilla, and all the bananas that grow there too. and if you take a banana without paying that gorilla in an abstract currency he’ll call a bunch of other gorillas, who are paid by a king gorilla, to come and beat tou and lock you in a cave. that’s private property. and it’s not only unique to humans, but also to a small sliver of human history and geography.
Geyanna Youness
Mammal in a Sunday Dress, by Georgina M. Cox, 2026
Mammal in a Sunday Dress explores the uneasy relationship between femininity, civilisation, and the animal body. At first glance, the figure appears modest and withdrawn. Her posture is composed, her gaze seemingly lowered towards her bare feet, recalling the conventions of nineteenth-century portraiture where women were often depicted as passive objects of observation. Yet as the viewer moves closer, the illusion collapses. Her eyes are not lowered at all. She is looking directly back. The delayed eye contact transforms the encounter. The viewer approaches believing they are safely observing a woman; instead, they realise they have been observed themselves. The work refuses the traditional power dynamic of portraiture, denying the comfort of anonymous spectatorship. Looking becomes a reciprocal act. For Cox, the painting considers humanity's persistent desire to separate itself from the rest of the animal kingdom. The title quietly undermines this distinction. A "mammal" is not another creature—it is us. The Sunday dress, rich with cultural associations of femininity, morality, and respectability, becomes an attempt to distinguish ourselves from nature. Yet clothing cannot alter biology. Beneath lace and ritual remains the same vulnerable animal body. The work also reflects on the historical relationship between women and nature. Across art, religion, and philosophy, women have repeatedly been positioned as closer to instinct, emotion, reproduction, and the body itself, while men have been aligned with reason, culture, and civilisation. Mammal in a Sunday Dress does not reject this comparison. Instead, it questions why proximity to nature has so often been treated as something lesser. Chiaroscuro isolates the figure within darkness, allowing the luminous dress to symbolise the performance of civilisation while the bare feet quietly return the body to the earth. Neither is presented as more truthful than the other. The painting exists in the tension between performance and instinct, refinement and biology. Mammal in a Sunday Dress ultimately asks a simple but unsettling question: if every layer of culture were stripped away, what would remain? Not a king. Not a saint. Not a gentleman or a lady. Only another mammal, looking back.
source
This post is a zombie. 🧟♀️ Pick one of the answers to see if you were bit or not. (There are 5 bite results out of 12 under the cut.) Best of luck. My deadeye is awaiting to meet any infected at the entrance of camp.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
A. Zombie bit you! 🧟
B. Safe
C. Zombie bit you! 🧟♀️
D. Safe
E. Safe
F. Safe
G. Zombie bit you! 🧟♂️
H. Zombie bit you! 🧟♀️
I. Safe
J. Safe
K. Zombie bit you! 🧟♂️
L. Safe
Seems legit
we all hear about kudzu being introduced as "erosion control" in the South but I don't think contemporary people understand on a gut level what that means
these are images from a 1930s pamphlet that endorsed kudzu, entitled "stop gullies: save your farm"
It was Bad.
Invasive plants need to be understood as part of a much larger cycle of incredible violence against the land.
For context: erosion on that scale occurred as a result of our clear-cutting entire states. The land east of the Mississippi used to be covered in old-growth forest to an extent that we literally can’t imagine anymore, because most of us have never seen a forest over 100 years old. It turns out if you remove all vegetation from a landscape, you end up with a bunch of loose soil ready to move downstream. A fast-growing plant that covers everything in dense vegetation sounds like salvation when you’re surrounded by 40-foot deep gullies that get wider with every rainstorm.
A lot of the south too was covered in Canebreaks, basically bamboo forests like a lot of South Asia, I don't know the specifics of the ecology, but bamboo being a grass I assume is rhizomatic like other grasses and forms a big net of roots that prevent erosion. *I assume* (pleez ecologists weigh in)
Yes, the destruction of Canebrakes was a direct cause of this erosion we see here. Canebrakes were destroyed, using slave labor, to make room for cotton plantations. You can read about it here.
Canebrakes built up incredibly rich, fertile soil and are amazing at preventing erosion. They form incredibly strong mats of rhizomes. And their roots are known to go 10 feet deep into the soil.
The erosion we see in these pictures was a result, very much directly, of the Canebrakes being destroyed.
This is a case study in how violence against ecosystems goes so closely hand in hand with violence against people. The violence against the indigenous caretakers of the land, and the violence against the enslaved captives that were forced to clear the Rivercane and work the cotton fields that would degrade the soil into nothing.
Alexandre Hogue, Crucified Land, 1939
This painting was added in another reblog chain, it's good to have it on this thread
if i had three wishes they would all be to make web 2.0 utterly illegal and go back to normal html
how do we explain to children that all our tech briefly worked perfectly and over time we threw it all away for sleek menus and corporate opacity
"we could give you a link to this mp3 OR we could run it in a proprietary player app that must connect to the internet every time you hit the resume button"
when i upgraded from a flip phone to an iphone and realized i could no longer record and set a custom ringtone because apple wanted me to buy radio pop ringtones, i realized, oh cool new tech isnt made for us it's made to exploit us and we are going to let it happen
ouch
it's been so long I can't even remember that technology is supposed to help us, not exploit us
I see polyamory as a spectrum. The vast majority of monogamous people still experience attraction to other people when in relationships, whether or not they act on it. Their saturation point for relationships being sustainable is just 1. Sometimes polyamorous people have a saturation point of 2 other people, and sometimes they never find a limit. Sometimes the number differs depending on whether the relationship(s) are romantic or strictly sexual or something in between. There are "monogamous" cheaters (by definition this is a form of practicing non-monogamy, but unethically, of course). There are polyam people in exclusive relationships who stay that way indefinitely (and may be content!) either because their partner is monogamous or because they aren't in the right place to seek/have other partners. I think that like many things, the monogamy-polyamory dichotomy of relationships is less of a real, hard and fast dichotomy.
more 26 & her two spring cubs
[incoherent babbling and pointing]
someone mentioned that they had never seen a bear sploot before, and since this sploot from september 2025 lives in my brain at all times i decided to go hunt it down and make everyone else see it again too