Private Mind Nerd Dungeon

Because would be easier to list everything I'm NOT interested in as opposed to what I AM interested in, I'm just going to say I have very eclectic tastes.

[theconcealedweapon]

[louisegluckpdf]

i think every publisher should have to institute a ban on books that fail what i’m calling the “little life” and “what else?” tests

[louisegluckpdf]

for reference.

[orcboxer]

"When I taught creative writing at Princeton, [my students] had been told all of their lives to write what they knew. I always began the course by saying, “Don’t pay any attention to that.” First, because you don’t know anything and second, because I don’t want to hear about your true love and your mama and your papa and your friends. Think of somebody you don’t know. What about a Mexican waitress in the Rio Grande who can barely speak English? Or what about a Grande Madame in Paris? Things way outside their camp. Imagine it, create it. Don’t record and editorialize on some event that you’ve already lived through. I was always amazed at how effective that was. They were always out of the box when they were given license to imagine something wholly outside their existence. I thought it was a good training for them. Even if they ended up just writing an autobiography, at least they could relate to themselves as strangers."

-Toni Morrison in an 2014 interview with NEA Arts Magazine

[cappydoodle]

two of them

[chirmartir]

Ch👏

[pomrania]

I really appreciate seeing it without the lion costume, so you can see what an AMAZING feat of athleticism it truly is.

[justlookatthosesausages]

Wushou dancers are 100% drift compatible

[fandom-man]

[charlesoberonn]

Two conclusions to be drawn from this picture:

1 - the geese in the background show that the fake coyote doesn't deter geese

2 - the fact they needed to put up a sign implies that the fake coyote did deter humans

[safetytank]

#3- the geese have learnt to read

[yookay-times]

[duchessvongooseberg]

[fliesinthescreen]

mom called me a fag yesterday by accident

[fliesinthescreen]

she was going to call me a bitch (playful) and i saw her gears turning like no but he's trans i need to call him the male equivalent. and then say fag and look so so surprised at the word that came out of her own mouth. it was like watching someone fail a disco elysium skill check irl

[fliesinthescreen]

AUTHORITY - One of your sons is being annoying to the other. Make it clear that you think this is unfair.

YOU - "Stop being a b--"

REACTION SPEED [Challenging: Success] - Wait a minute.

DRAMA - Sire, the word you're about to use is historically feminine! Applying it to your transgender child is tantamount to misgendering him.

1. [Suggestion - Legendary 14] Think of a masculine equivalent to "bitch."

[guerrillatech]

[kedreeva]

if you, like me, are hesitant to enjoy what kinda sounds like "relaxes food standards" on the surface, I'm happy to report that this isn't "everyone can do what they want with your food supply without oversight" but rather a case where in NYC you had to have a permit to sell food and a second, superfluous permit to sell frozen desserts. This action simply removes the need for the second permit, rolling it into the first permit in order to help small businesses. Yay!

[nixcraft]

[beesmygod]

also at the end when they ask you "any questions?" and you can't think of anything: ask about parking. even if you don't have a car.

[homeschooledangel]

I have an interview today in a couple hours, how did the algorithm know I needed this

[faunlord]

Btw when they ask if you have questions some actual good options are stuff like “what’s a typical day like in this role” or “is this job open because someone is leaving or is this a new position”

[sequintial]

Another good question I stole from a reddit post that has really impressed all interviewers (two job offers!) is: "let's say you hire me and in a year you're thinking you made a really great choice. What will I have done to make you think that?"

It gets them talking about what they're looking for in the role, thinking about how you could fit it, and lets you end the interview getting to reiterate how good you would be for the role and how enthusiastic you are for it.

[nessataleweaver]

If you get the 'tell me about yourself' I've actually had at least one interview where they want to know about you as a person.

It might be worth asking them "Do you mean professionally, to get an idea of my work, or personally to see how I'll fit into the workplace culture?"

[theplaceinsidetheblizzard]

Y’know an awful lot of Terry Pratchett’s books are concerned with how powerful women are when they get angry and how important anger is as a driving force to defend what is right and to tackle injustice. 

A lot of his most interesting and most deeply moral characters are angry ones. Granny Weatherwax, Sam Vimes, Tiffany Aching. All are to a large extent driven to do good by anger.

And that honestly means a lot to me.

[thebibliosphere]

Terry was an angry man. This is not the same as saying he was a bad man. He held a righteous fury, the kind that comes from looking at the world, and knowing just how much better it could be if only we stopped being bastards. He held a genuine belief that people can and do change the world for the better, not by big things, but by the little. He believed in the kindness of others, and that kindness means more than wishing well and prayers. He knew the difference between being good and doing good, and that you technically couldn’t be the first without the latter.

He was angry at the world because he loved it, and he wanted us to feel the same, to not feel helpless, to know that something can be done, to know that anger is not just the tool of abusers and tyrants but the chisel by which The People might chip away at oppression and fear and bring it crumbling down. He gave us the drive needed to believe in hope. because he wanted to make the world better with words and not violence.

I hope he knows that he did.

[eudaimonia83]

🥹🥹🥹 Terry is loved, and missed, and through his stories is still making the world a better place. Strong work, sir. ❤️

[lightofraye]

Sir Terry Pratchett understood the pen is a sword in its own right.

[the-haiku-bot]

Sir Terry Pratchett

understood the pen is a

sword in its own right.

Beep boop! I look for accidental haiku posts. Sometimes I mess up.

[angstandhappiness]

Neat

[theplaceinsidetheblizzard]

Y’know an awful lot of Terry Pratchett’s books are concerned with how powerful women are when they get angry and how important anger is as a driving force to defend what is right and to tackle injustice. 

A lot of his most interesting and most deeply moral characters are angry ones. Granny Weatherwax, Sam Vimes, Tiffany Aching. All are to a large extent driven to do good by anger.

And that honestly means a lot to me.

[thebibliosphere]

Terry was an angry man. This is not the same as saying he was a bad man. He held a righteous fury, the kind that comes from looking at the world, and knowing just how much better it could be if only we stopped being bastards. He held a genuine belief that people can and do change the world for the better, not by big things, but by the little. He believed in the kindness of others, and that kindness means more than wishing well and prayers. He knew the difference between being good and doing good, and that you technically couldn’t be the first without the latter.

He was angry at the world because he loved it, and he wanted us to feel the same, to not feel helpless, to know that something can be done, to know that anger is not just the tool of abusers and tyrants but the chisel by which The People might chip away at oppression and fear and bring it crumbling down. He gave us the drive needed to believe in hope. because he wanted to make the world better with words and not violence.

I hope he knows that he did.

[eudaimonia83]

🥹🥹🥹 Terry is loved, and missed, and through his stories is still making the world a better place. Strong work, sir. ❤️

[lightofraye]

Sir Terry Pratchett understood the pen is a sword in its own right.

[the-haiku-bot]

Sir Terry Pratchett

understood the pen is a

sword in its own right.

Beep boop! I look for accidental haiku posts. Sometimes I mess up.

[angstandhappiness]

Neat

[beemovieerotica]

the cognitive dissonance from people who want the products of modern medicine but get weird about animal research. like im sorry but this is necessary for the survival of the society we currently live in. and the scientists who work on these things are not evil cackling psychopaths. anyone you talk to in animal research has incredibly complex feelings about their work and incredibly complex relationships to the animals in their care. there are regulations and oversight and penalties in place to make the work as humane as possible and scientists are overwhelmingly the ones enforcing and advocating for better care.

[beemovieerotica]

@velvetdemon I'm doing a full reply because I want to give this question the time and space it deserves, and I really do appreciate your curiosity about this.

The short answer: It is deeply unethical. There are nowhere near enough willing patients in the world to be able to do this, and it would be criminal to put them through this.

The long answer: The one side of the equation you're focusing on is: how much of a drug is too much, to the point where it will cause negative side effects or even death? And this is crucial to know. But it's not just a matter of finding out the lethal dosage of a heart cholesterol medication, you need to know that it can actually lower the cholesterol of any living thing. There is no way to know this without giving it first to...a living thing.

But beyond this, I need to emphasize: The goal of a drug trial is to effectively cure people who are already suffering from disease, who are living on limited time.

Drug trials don't just happen on any member of the public, they need to happen specifically on people affected by the disease you're trying to treat. There is at any time a very limited and very marginalized population of the world affected by early onset, familial Parkinson's disease. Because you cannot ethically induce disease in a human being, you are working with, speaking with, and helping patients and their families who are hopeful and desperate for a cure.

If you were to jump straight to human trials from petri dishes, not knowing absolutely anything about how the drug functions in a living, breathing animal body, it would look like this:

We didn't know that minute quantities of the drug interact lethally with x, y, z medication that people are commonly also taking. X number of patients have died as a result.

We didn't know that the drug is fatal to people with [common variant] in their genetics. X more patients have died.

We didn't know the drug exacerbates x, y, z chronic illnesses. X number of people have acquired permanent, lifelong disabilities.

We didn't know the best way to deliver the drug, so we tried multiple ways: the people who received it intravenously are now suffering from a painful, costly, and debilitating condition that did not happen with the ingested form.

I could go on, and on, and on.

The vast majority of these problems can be nearly or almost entirely averted by testing other animals first.

These are all people who possibly could have waited for the normal progression from animal testing to human testing and thus received better outcomes. Some people will pass away in the time it takes to get to that point, and that's heartbreaking, and we all wish science could be faster.

But the cost of expediting science could mean a life of profoundly greater suffering or an even shorter life than the one where no intervention happens at all. And at that point, you have completely exhausted your trust, your goodwill, and your patients' hope, after you've failed to do anything or even worsened the lives of people who are already deeply suffering.

[manslaughter]

hi, i’m an animal research professional. making sure laboratory animals stay alive, healthy, and enriched has been my full-time job for several years now.

animal research is not the mad scientist wild west that PETA wants you to think it is. there are extremely strict federal laws in place to protect the well being of these animals. animal welfare organizations like AAALAC ensure that lab animals are treated with dignity & respect and are given enough specialized care & enrichment to be happy and content in captivity, just like AZA accreditation with zoos.

not a single animal from a zebrafish to a mouse to a dog to a macaque goes unaccounted for. if an animal gets moved to a new cage, paired for breeding, has a procedure performed on it, gives birth, gets sick or injured, dies, etc. it is legally required that this information is recorded and kept on file for the US federal government to access. failing to record & retain this information is very much punishable by US federal law.

let me tell you - if you abuse or kill an animal, even a mouse - you are almost certainly getting both fired & blacklisted from the industry. if you abuse or kill a more ‘advanced’ animal, such as a dog or monkey, you will likely face criminal charges. killing a monkey is as serious and disastrous as a nuclear meltdown. you are expected to reasonably explain every illness, injury, or death of an animal under your care. you must record all of this information. animals that are clearly suffering with low QOL are required to be euthanized according to AVMA guidelines.

research animals are highly expensive. yes, even the "lesser" animals like mice. the cheapest mice will run you a few hundred $ per individual, with some of the most expensive mice i've cared for being $25,000 per individual. in research we have the "three Rs" - reduction (reduce amount of necessary animals to a minimum), refinement (refine processes to ensure research is accurate and animals feel no pain or distress), and replacement (replace animals with non-living research models as they become available). i can assure you no proper research team is wasting animals (*do not* say "b-b-but elon musk--" his research team is actively being investigated for animal abuse by the government).

research methods that do not require live animals are currently being looked into & efforts spearheaded by - you guessed it - the animal research industry itself (notice how the animal rights people are strangely silent & unhelpful when it comes to this?) but current technology is rudimentary and does not compare to live animal models.

some research animal fun facts (US edition):

all species of animals are only allowed to have one single major surgery performed on them in their entire lifetime.

institutions with nonhuman primates must have a behavior program in place (run by knowledgeable primate specialists) to ensure that they are happy and receiving enough daily enrichment and social interaction.

institutions with dogs are required to have physical exercise programs in place. this means every individual dog gets a substantial amount of leashed AND free-roaming exercise daily, including playgroups with other dogs.

a majority of nonhuman primates get to retire to sanctuaries like peaceable primate sanctuary, and almost all dogs get retired and adopted out by organizations like homes for animal heroes. some institutions will also adopt out unneeded young rabbits, guinea pigs, rats, etc.

some strains of mice glow neon green (or orange or blue) under UV light. this is not harmful to them and is commonly seen in cancer research.

so yes, you can rest knowing that laboratory animals are treated with the utmost respect by their caretakers. and you can stop this awful, ignorant talk of human experimentation that will only end in the abuse of nonwhite people, LGBT people, disabled people, indigenous people, and so many others. please just take a look at this wikipedia page if you think “ethical” human experimentation can exist.

[liberalsarecool]

Stay engaged.

[bellabrady]

incorrect buddie quotes part idk

[hotvampireadjacent]

[evergreen-femme]

had to share this

[wizardshark]

In every way this is set up to be a joke like any other short video, it even uses the trope of main character in a wig to represent their mom, but it isn't funny at all. It's just sweet and nice

[stinkfight-deactivated20190822]

was cruisin my tl & this is so fucking important

[jumpingjacktrash]

i think the moment i was disillusioned about life was when i was maybe 7 years old and realized the reason all my friends had become assholes was because boys aren’t allowed to have any physcial contact that isn’t fighting

my parents were hippie feminists so my brother and i could play clapping games and sleep in puppy piles and give each other weird hairdos, but all the ‘normal’ boys just up and stopped knowing how to touch anyone without hitting sometime between kindergarten and first grade

and my little kid mind briefly saw the vastness of life stretching out in front of all of us, and all the hugs everyone would need and not get, and for a moment i was just like

maybe life is not such a good idea after all

[comradesepsis]

I grew up around a Russian ballet school. Let me tell you something about Russian men: They touch each other. Especially dancers, who are in my experience almost always super tactile people. They rough house like Americans, but they also hug each other, and sit on each other’s laps, and share blankets when it’s cold backstage.

So I grew up knowing full well that the whole Men Don’t Touch thing was puritanical bullshit.

What I was absolutely not prepared for, however, is the super intense effect it has on straight men’s romantic relationships.

Because when you are literally the only person it is okay for your boyfriend to touch, Jesus fucking Christ, that changes the game.

I strongly suspect that a lot of Str8 Dude feelings of entitlement to women’s bodies, particularly the bodies of their wives and girlfriends, is a direct result of those women being the only non-violent physical contact they’re allowed to have.

I know for certain that the framing of any and all platonic physical contact as un-manly has been directly responsible for a lot of sexual dysfunction (and then the attendant misery of trying to get that treated at the ripe old age of 22) with at least one of my exes. It’s a mess when you can’t get it up because you’re depressed and want to be held but you’ve been brainwashed into thinking what you actually want is sex because being held is for girls.

Amazing how the erectile dysfunction went completely away when he learned the difference between feeling horny and feeling cuddly. /sarcasm

[warpedellipsis]

This stuff also ties into the “anyone who smiles at me wants to bang”, via the same can’t touch/can’t be affectionate, so

–>all touch is sexual, no touch is platonic

–>thus anyone I do touch/am affectionate with is SUPER SPECIAL and sexual

–>thus every woman who’s nice to me wants to bang

–>being nice means you want to bang

–>being nice to a woman means I want to bang her

–>I can’t be nice to a woman unless I want to bang her, if she’s nice to me then she wants to bang

–>I fall in love with any and all nice women

That explains a whole lot of the complaints women have about men. I don’t think it’s this simple, but it sure feeds into those problems.