
oozey mess
Cosmic Funnies
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open

blake kathryn
NASA
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
EXPECTATIONS
No title available
Claire Keane
we're not kids anymore.
todays bird

Product Placement

gracie abrams
macklin celebrini has autism
Monterey Bay Aquarium

roma★

Discoholic 🪩
Keni

Kiana Khansmith

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from Costa Rica
seen from United States

seen from Brazil
seen from Philippines
seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from India

seen from Portugal

seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Colombia
seen from United States
@mr-w-rambles
I’ve noticed this trend on tumblr where people seem to think that transmedicalism is just some generic term that means medical transition is the ‘best’ form of transition. When in fact, transmedicalism is an entire ‘theory’ of transsexuality - one that frames transsexualism as a sexual disorder, ‘curable’ only through medical and psychiatric intervention by experts who ‘know better.’ It comes out of a cissexist ideology that preserves the sanctity of cissexualism by relegating transsexuality to the realm of disease and perversion. It positions transsexuality as an aberration, something to be cured, an exception that proves the rule of nature.
The former definition is de-politicised and ahistorical, and I think when you adopt that former definition, you quickly run into conclusions about how asserting the importance of medical transition is itself normative - that to resist transmedicalism means to instead privilege a generalised fluid ‘queerness’ that eschews more durable and lasting forms of transition (HRT, surgery, name/gender marker changes) in favour of something that is more ‘radical’ than transsexuality. Because after all, isn’t the goal of medical transition to just look like a cis person? You see this line of thinking in the invocation of the “binary trans person” - an assimilationist transgender subject. The act of remaking one’s entire body and administrative relationship to the state is positioned as normative in comparison to the act of ‘individual’ (ie, non-state, non-administrative, non-medical) self-identification and expression.
This is a massive betrayal of our trans siblings, of course, not least of all because it deliberately ignores the coordinated efforts of all levels of state governments, the media, medical and psychiatric institutions, religious organisations, and civil society broadly to eliminate trans people from the world. A trans person who is denied HRT and gender marker changes is not more radical for being forced into that position, nor is the assertion that they should have access to those things somehow cisnormative. If it was so normative, they’d give us those things in a heartbeat! Shouldn’t it preserve the cissexual order by giving HRT to minors so they don’t have to go through the wrong puberty and look as much like cis people as possible? But somehow our enemies have come to the opposite conclusion - that we are freaks, degenerates, perverts and predators who want to mutilate ourselves and every child on planet earth. To change one’s sex is to thwart the will of god and destroy meaning itself.
I think this mode of thinking valorises transgender suffering as noble and radical, that being closeted, being denied care, or having to hide one’s transness in the many spheres of our lives (such as work, family, social activities, dating, etc) is itself a radical act. And I think it sucks real bad! It patronises our trans siblings who suffer under oppressive restrictions/bans by telling them they’re radical for not transitioning ‘the normative way,’ and it condescends to our trans siblings who assert their humanity through hormones, surgery, and name and sex marker changes by telling them they’re just trying to emulate cis people.
And if I can be particularly confrontational for a moment, I think some queer people believe trans people are monsters for doing this to ourselves, that we really are mutilating our bodies to “look like” cis people, that the act of bodily and administrative transformation is gross and weird. To access state or private health care (or worse, to use DIY hormones), to change our administrative being, is inherently assimilationist. Exercising a form of sovereignty by (to paraphrase Stryker & Sullivan) petitioning the king to correct the record is just bowing to the king himself.
Which to me speaks to a deeply nihilistic worldview where we’ve somehow reached the end of history with the human body. Remaking oneself in one’s own image is just rearranging the pieces on the board, a shuffling of what’s already there. Frankenstein’s monster isn’t so special after all - just a freak built out of pre-fabricated limbs, exactly equal to the sum of its parts. The act of bodily and administrative remaking is just emulation, not autonomy, not liberty, and certainly not creation. But the queer? The queer makes do with what they were given and finds ways to subvert cis-heterosexuality by the radical act of refusing to alter oneself and instead ‘queering’ the body they were ‘born with.’ This is in fact a much nobler, more radical, more revolutionary act - the act of moving forward by standing still. I see the claim that our transsexualism is normative and counter with the exact same claim about our queer cousins. I wonder if they’ll give us the benefit of the doubt when hearing their own words repeated back to them
Tenmaku no Jaadugar (2026) Ep. 5
Meduhydra
Image accessed at the Castlevania Wiki here [There are one of two reasons why I don’t use the Hacklopedia art for all of the Hackmaster monsters. One, sometimes I don’t like it. Two, and this is more common, the monster doesn’t have any art. I know that art is expensive for a small publisher, but couldn’t we have gotten more art for the weirdo monsters and less for the ones everyone already knows? This was a subset of hydra, for example, and the illustration is of a bog-standard hydra instead of the weird unique variation.
So I used art from Medusa as she appears in Castlevania and Castlevania: Lament of Innocence. Where she’s just a giant head. It’s probably where Hackmaster got the idea anyway.]
Meduhydra CR 12 NE Aberration This creature resembles an enormous severed head with a reptilian cast to the features and a maw of fangs. It drags itself on a short, snail-like tail, and five serpentine heads grow from its scalp.
The meduhydra is an abominable creature that combines the worst aspects of two of the most notorious marsh dwellers. These monsters are an unnatural creation formed through ritual magic—a literal fusion of a hydra with a medusa. The transmogrified thing is intermediate between a medusa and a hydra in terms of intelligence, but far outstrips either in terms of physical prowess. Meduhydras remember fragments of their original lives and are thus bitterly resentful, hateful creatures that take out their wrath on any who cross their paths. This typically includes their creator—most of those demented enough to create a meduhydra keep it in line with powerful enchantment magic, or turn it loose as a weapon of terror before fleeing its area of influence.
Like their hydra kin, a meduhydra is a predator par excellence, striking from ambush with multiple venomous bites. Those that do not succumb to its venom are frequently petrified by its gaze—the meduhydra cannot gain sustenance from petrified creatures, and usually shatters them in rage before moving on. Meduhydras keep their lairs decorated in treasure and finery in a remembrance of the sophisticated and intelligent creatures they once were. Their lack of hands often results in treasures being filthy and scattered haphazardly, rather than neatly arranged.
As unnatural beings, meduhydras cannot reproduce and have no society to speak of. Some dark rumors suggest that a meduhydra’s severed snake head can, under the right circumstances, grow a new body and become a meduhydra of its own right. If this is true, meduhydras could potentially rise from being a terrifying curiosity to a major hazard in swamps around the world.
Keep reading
Warhammer 40,000 is of course, uh, not unproblematic. But patterning orks specifically and incredibly blatantly off English football hooligan culture was probably simultaneously the least bigoted and most creative thing literally anyone did with the concept of 'the orc' at any point in the 1980s
If the woman that JK rowling posted an upskirt photo of had been a cis woman snopes wouldn't have said this was "mixed" and you know it.
Not that it was necessary, but I looked up definitions, and yeah, obviously "taking a photo under someone's skirt" is literally it. Fuck Snopes so fucking hard. I need them to explain to me how it doesn't fit the definition to a fucking t:
And what the FUCK do they mean, "public setting"?? Yeah, upskirts are mistly taken in public fucking settings! That's not an eycuse, that's part of the fucking issue
And truly what do they mean it was in public? Does that mean that the upskirt photos people take on subways dont count because other people are around? OF COURSE IT WAS IN PUBLIC THATS HOW THE PHOTO GOT TAKEN IF SHE HAD BEEN PHOTOGRAPHED AT HOME IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BREAKING AND ENTERING
what do they mean "it wasn't taken surreptitiously"? there isn't any implication here except that because Freda Wallace was in public, she consented to any pictures that might be taken of her? this is just "look at the way she* was dressed". snopes is doing rape culture.
https://archive.is/Nv1K1
according to archives the first version of the snopes article listed it as "true," but it seems to have been changed. given rowling's widely known history of extreme and aggressive litigiousness i'd be willing to bet her legal team probably objected and snopes caved
@pitbolshevik ^ you were right
It was important to me that she puts emphasis on the TOK
swifties always going on the "you just hate women" defense like first of all Taylor Swift is not a woman she's an unskippable ad
actually yes this needs to be kept as part of this conversation
> turns on my computer
> disables a new AI feature that was turned on by default
> opens my email
> disables a new AI feature that was turned on by default
> launches a software
> disables a new AI fea
Honestly, at this point, if you're still bitching about AI but not moving to open-source and nonprofit software/tech/services, you deserve it. Shut up or stop using it. Those of us who've put in the effort to switch to non-evil tech are sick of the purposeless whining.
I've been nicely letting everyone suggest open source on this post because it might genuinely be useful to someone but because you've decided to be a condescending little bastard- this might be a hard concept to grasp, but some of us actually have jobs. Some of those jobs also provide us with computers equipped with an OS we have zero say over, to use software we also have zero say over. Kindly get off your high horse and suck my dick.
As someone who has worked in IT for the past 17 years, I'd also like to say that there is often a higher barrier of entry for open-source software / operating systems when it comes to technical knowledge and ability, and those who can't jump that barrier still deserve to not have AI programs installed on their devices without their knowledge or consent. Someone who struggles with Windows is not going to be able to just hop into Linux, especially when they probably have other things going on in their lives and don't have the time to sit down and learn a brand new operating system. Someone who doesn't even recognize that there are different browsers, much less open-source ones that aren't Chromium forks, isn't going to be able to seek out one they can both a.) safely download, b.) install, and c.) use instead of the shortcut they know as The Internet.
And sure, you can dismiss these people as lazy, as stupid, as being elderly and so who cares. But from my 17 years of experience, I can tell you that technical instinct and ability varies widely across the entire adult spectrum. And I can also tell you that people have different strengths, and that just because someone isn't good with computers doesn't mean they aren't smart as hell.
And I can also say, again, that it really doesn't matter.
Companies like Microsoft and Google sneaking AI software into devices and software without the consent of those using the software or devices is wrong. It's invasive and raises major security concerns. People should not have to learn entirely new operating systems to escape this nonsense. It's an unreasonable expectation, and it fails to hold companies like Microsoft and Google accountable for their malicious behavior.
If the woman that JK rowling posted an upskirt photo of had been a cis woman snopes wouldn't have said this was "mixed" and you know it.
Not that it was necessary, but I looked up definitions, and yeah, obviously "taking a photo under someone's skirt" is literally it. Fuck Snopes so fucking hard. I need them to explain to me how it doesn't fit the definition to a fucking t:
And what the FUCK do they mean, "public setting"?? Yeah, upskirts are mistly taken in public fucking settings! That's not an eycuse, that's part of the fucking issue
And truly what do they mean it was in public? Does that mean that the upskirt photos people take on subways dont count because other people are around? OF COURSE IT WAS IN PUBLIC THATS HOW THE PHOTO GOT TAKEN IF SHE HAD BEEN PHOTOGRAPHED AT HOME IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BREAKING AND ENTERING
what do they mean "it wasn't taken surreptitiously"? there isn't any implication here except that because Freda Wallace was in public, she consented to any pictures that might be taken of her? this is just "look at the way she* was dressed". snopes is doing rape culture.
trying this again; black trans and disabled, trying to get on disability while unemployed but needs help on back rent and utilities. donate if you’re able, please share if you can’t 🤍
https://cash.app/$Avibb
https://venmo.com/u/avibb
https://www.paypal.me/avibbk
pls ask for z*lle if needed
0/400
First pic is my landlords, second is my bank account, i could really use a miracle right now bc i fully owe utilities now too
140/400
Thank you so so much 🥺
shes soooooo cute
If there is one thing I wish well-meaning but uninformed people understood about the ongoing attack on trans people it is that transphobes lie constantly and their actions prove this.
When they say they just have legitimate concerns about the safety of women and children they're lying.
When they say they care about the integrity and fairness of women's sports they're lying.
When they say are just trying to stand up for freedom of speech they're lying.
And when they say they're "gender critical", "gender abolitionists", or "anti-gender" what they really mean is that they want strict gender policing and segregation and transition bans and also that they are terminally bioessentialist.
Even trans people on here often seem to buy that last point and assume that radfems are in any way sincere advocates for gender abolition. They're not. They're doing motte-and-bailey rhetoric on you.
Also, please do not listen to how people talk about cover letters on this site. Cover letters are important, and in many industries you can be damn sure they'll be read. And no, they're not 'fanfic about working in your office', or just re-stating the resume contents in a fancier guise. If you treat them like that, then of course they're not doing much for you. That makes you sound like a syncophantic windbag, and it's not doing anything else to help.
I was trained in the dark arts of the cover letter by my mother, who is a hiring manager. And her training has paid off: I've been consistently told my cover letters are excellent. Let me pass on the wisdom.
The job of a cover letter is to give a prospective employer strictly more information than is on the resume. This is where you take the resume contents and put them into context. You look at the job requirements (you are looking at the job requirements before applying, right?) and look at your resume and ask the question (in your head) "why would a person think this candidate would be good for this job?" and your cover letter is the answer to that question. If you don't answer that question, the hiring manager is going to have to do it themselves, and you have way more information to work with than they do.
This is especially important if you're moving from one industry to another, because then the relevant connections aren't obvious. It's also very important if you're overqualified, because then you can use the letter to say "I know it looks like this job would be too entry-level for me, but I'm interested to pursue it for reasons x, y, and z". You can also use this space to explain away something that might otherwise be disqualifying, like job-hopping or a long break in employment. The tone to strike here is always matter-of-fact and constrained to topic - don't go into detail about health stuff or personal tragedy, just tell them what they need to hear: that this period of your resume was affected by [bad thing] but that it's now in the past and you're looking forward to the next chapter. Remember, one of the things they're trying to learn is whether you'd be content in this role, or whether you'd be miserable and leave after 2 months, which would force them to do all the work of hiring again. You're trying to establish that you will fit right in and not cause problems. Knowing what drew you to this job in particular (and don't just say 'money', that's true for everyone) helps with that.
And the other mistake? Everyone writes cover letters that are too long. One page is fine. Two is the absolute maximum, and that's if you have a lot of specific things to say. It's a waste of your time and theirs to pad it out with fluff. Of my two most recent successful cover letters (i.e. jobs for which I was interviewed) one was 390 words and the other was 550. That's the length of this post. How long did it take me to write this post? About 15 minutes to write, 5 to proof and edit. That's how long you should be spending on a cover letter, maximum.
Size comparison of Y’gathok, the Ceaseless Hunger and Bjorn, our level 20 Goliath Barbarian.
Hey quick question: why the FUCK do you have that
Imagine, from out of nowhere, your dm casually slapping this thing down on the table like any other encounter.
“Yeah, the fight will start in a sec, uh…I’ll give inspiration to whomever helps me get this fucking box out of my car.”
https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/7asxci/oc_ygathok_the_ceaseless_hunger_final_boss_of_our/ This is the reveal of this ridiculousness during their game
Please watch this reveal video it’s kickass
FUCK ME the reveal video
“CHRIS??????”
“Um, I don’t think our plan is gonna work.”
Always reblog Y'gathok
always ALWAYS reblog Y'gathok!