I'd rather be in outer space 🛸
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
Cosimo Galluzzi

Andulka
tumblr dot com
Alisa U Zemlji Chuda
Stranger Things

Janaina Medeiros
No title available

Discoholic 🪩
almost home
KIROKAZE
d e v o n
Keni
RMH
styofa doing anything

PR's Tumblrdome

if i look back, i am lost

⁂
hello vonnie

seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from Singapore
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia

seen from Singapore

seen from Romania

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from Malaysia

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia

seen from Japan
seen from Malaysia

seen from United States
seen from Lithuania
seen from United States
seen from Lithuania
@nerdgirl86
You can tell he’s going “ohhHhhhhHHH!” 😩😭 this is so cute lmao
this is one of most wholesome me posts ive ever seen
ok tumblr, you seem interested in political activism, so we’re going to have a little lesson in administrative law and how you can force the Trump administration to listen to you for the next four years.
To condense a semester-long law school course into a blog post: Congress delegates significant quasi-legislative power to administrative agencies, e.g. the EPA. These agencies have a great deal of power to shape your everyday life, but our system of civics education is so abysmal that, chances are, you have no idea what kind of power you hold to shape their decisions.
Administrative agencies have to navigate a maze of laws and procedures in order for the rules they make to be effective and binding. These laws and procedures mean that there plenty of ways the agencies can mess up, and when they do, opponents of a rule can bring legal challenges and invalidate it. (This is frustrating for agencies, but delightfully fun for antagonistic nerds like me.)
When an agency wants to create an informal rule, it has to go through a process called “notice and comment.” Basically, the agency announces a proposed rule and permits the public to submit comments on it. The public includes you.
When the comment period is over, the agency has to take the comments into account and justify its ultimate decision on the proposed rule in light of the comments. If you submit substantive, meaningful comments that challenge the policy or evidence behind a rule, and the agency fails to acknowledge them and explain its reasoning for its final decision, the rule can be challenged and invalidated.
So how do you comment on proposed rules? This lovely little site called regulations.gov. Really, it’s that easy! You can search for topics that interest you and submit your comments online. And you can do it anonymously!
So please, check the website frequently and comment when it matters to you, so that your voice can be heard and Trump’s agencies have to acknowledge your perspective. If they fail to take your comments into consideration and disregard the American people, they’ll have to answer for it in court.
Keep calling your representatives and senators about Bannon and the policy issues that concern you, but remember this little lesson in admin law when he takes office.
THIS IS ALL TRUE TRUTHS, Y’ALL. Like, Obamacare, as an example? Congress passed the law and Obama signed it, and then HHS and several other organizations took literally YEARS to write proposed regs, publish them, comb through public comments, rewrite and justify them, and the finalize them. The regulations.gov site has time and topic filters – this is another way to influence things.
It also helps first year associates, law clerks, and interns. Because when someone wants to litigate about whether the agency did things properly it helps to have lots of substantive, useful comments. So the big fancy lawyers can be like “dude, why didn’t you listen to these comments?”
That is how really long, boring administrative law cases are made. It’s like the opposite of the law-making sausage analogy. It’s like taking individual sausages apart and analyzing each molecule.
whenever i’m talking to someone and they tell me about something that happened to them i always tell them about something that happened to me that’s similar to what happened to them. i do it as kind of a “oh hey yeah this happened to me so i can relate to what you’re going through” but i’m always afraid it comes out as “oh yeah well this happened to me so clearly i have it tougher than you” or “i’m done talking about you let’s talk about me”
i swear i don’t mean it like that……..
I run into this a lot with my job - so instead of telling the whole story I say something like, “Oh my gosh, I had something REALLY similar happen. What did you do after that??” And I’ve found that works. Usually they explain and then ask, “So what happened to you?” And then you’re invited to share, and the formula for conversing continues on. :)
of all the tumblr posts i’ve read, this one is going to change my life the fastest lol.
Thanks to both the OP for posting a thing that so many of us do, and the responder who gave us a better way to do it. You’re doing the lord’s work, my friend!
Fun fact: there isn’t anything wrong with you if you do what OP is describing.
Deborah Tannen’s work focuses on different conversational styles — the sets of behavioral norms and expectations that we bring with us to conversations. In one of her earlier articles, she describes two conflicting conversational styles that exist in the US.
One, which she (perhaps inaccurately) dubs “New York Jewish conversational style,” is based on the principle of building camaraderie with one’s interlocutor. The other, which she doesn’t really name but which we could call “mainstream American conversational style,” is based on the principle of not imposing on one’s interlocutor.
Each conversational style has its own behavioral norms. Mainstream American conversational style involves things like asking your interlocutor questions about him/herself and waiting until your interlocutor is clearly finished speaking until you say something. These demonstrate a focus on one’s interlocutor and a clear resistance to imposing. NYJ conversational style involves things like conversational overlaps — speaking at the same time as one’s interlocutor — and “swapping stories.” These demonstrate a high level of engagement with one’s interlocutor. Conversationalists using the mainstream American style make space for each other; conversationalists using the New York Jewish style carve out their own space.
Each of these conversational styles works well when the two people conversing have the same style. Imagine two friends meeting for drinks after work:
“Oh, hello! How was your trip here?” “Oh, it was awful. There was so much traffic on the turnpike.” “That’s terrible.” “I know. How was your trip?” “Well, there was an accident on the bridge.” “Oh no! Was there a big backup?” “Yeah, pretty big.”
“Oh, hi!” “Hey! Ugh, sorry I’m late, there was so much traffic on the turnpike—” “Oh my god, I know, there was an accident on the bridge and the cars were backed up a MILE—” “That is the worst, I remember one time I sat in traffic for an HOUR waiting to get through that toll, they really should—” “Add more EZ-pass lanes, right?” “Add more lanes, yeah, exactly.”
Both of these conversations worked: the participants feel that they’ve had their say and that they’ve been understood. They feel connected to their interlocutor.
But when people with conflicting conversational styles converse, that’s where things go wrong. Because we interpret other people’s contributions according to our own conversational style. So the person with mainstream American conversational style comes away thinking “Why did they keep interrupting me? Why didn’t they ask me any questions about me? Why were they so loud and emotional?” And the person with the New York Jewish conversational style comes away thinking “Why were they so disengaged? They didn’t seem involved in the conversation at all. They didn’t even offer any personal information.”
Rather, they would come away thinking that, except that we’re taught growing up that the first example conversation up there is what conversations should look like. So the person with the New York Jewish conversational style actually comes away from the conversation thinking “oh my god, what was I doing? I kept talking about myself. I think I kept interrupting them. I am so rude, god, I’m the worst.” When in fact: a) it’s about cultural difference, not individual moral qualities; and b) one conversational style isn’t inherently “better” than another.
Which isn’t to say that we shouldn’t attempt to bridge the gap between conversational styles, as suggested above. But we should be aware that:
TL;DR: Cultural difference is often mistaken for individual moral failings.
OH MY GOD THAT EXPLAINS SO MUCH
My wife and I used to have so many issues until we figured out that we had conflicting conversational styles. My style is the West Indian version of New York Jewish. The more interested, engaged and comfortable I am with the speaker, the louder, more emotional and more just jump in and talk while she was talking. Her style is the Jacksonville Florida version of mainstream American. Slow, measured, waiting for the other person to tell their story. Until we figured that out, I felt like she wasn’t engaged and she felt like I was bulldozing right over her. We’ve met in the middle. I give her more room to talk and she’s slowly learning to get excited and jump in.
This is actually really interesting for me in particular– I and a lot of people sort of “get by” on scripts because of autism or other reasons. So the idea that your scripts could be from an “incompatible” style and need tweaking depending on who you’re talking to adds another layer of complexity.
Also the fact that someone who can’t navigate social situations as well as others might never develop the “style” typical of the area of the world they live in, resulting in feelings of being an ‘outsider.’
Furthermore, there is the phenomenon that everybody seems to think everybody else from other regions (or countries!) is some shade of rude– it probably has less to do with character, and more to do with our communication styles. Whether we speak the same language as a primary language, or if someone’s transplanted a conversational style from a different, native language.
Music is important.
i’m watching this documentary about halloween and there’s a part where they’re explaining that ghost stories got really popular around the civil war no one could really deal with how many people went off and died and
the narrator just said
“the first ghost stories were really about coming home”
fuck
I’m not doing this in the correct tag-style, but.
IIRC, the Civil War also played a huge part in forming the modern American conception of heaven as this nice, domestic place where you’re reunited with your loved ones. People (particularly mothers) responded to the trauma of brother-killing-brother by imagining an afterlife in which families would once again be happy together.
(also not doing this in the correct tag-style, because I wanna KNOW— )What documentary is this? Or is there more than one? Any books on the subject? THIS IS FASCINATING.
cool (ghost) story, bro.
reblogging because, as a us history phd student, i want to say YAY for how much of this is totally on point. i also want to rec the book where a lot of this is covered very, very well, which is Drew Gilpin Faust’s “This Republic of Suffering: Death and the American Civil War.”
a lot of books on the Civil War are deadly dull because they’re about battles and shit, but as a transformative moment in mindset and ideology, it becomes *fascinating*
the other book I’d even more highly rec is David W. Blight’s “Race and Reunion,” which is about how the “(white) brother against (white) brother” image of the war was invented and how throwing African Americans to the merciless viciousness of post-Reconstruction racist whites was part of constructing this “oh everybody was white men and everybody was noble let’s celebrate them all” approach to Civil War remembrance
very good stuff
Thank you! This looks like exactly the sort of reading I’m after! *adds to wish list*
Also, look for David Blights recordings of his Yale lecture series on The Civil War. 21 hours of class lectures, and its FASCINATING. He barely touches on the battles other than to use them as timestamps as to what was going on. Most of it focuses on what the mindset of everyone was going into the war, and what happened on the way out. It’s an amazing series that will change your entire perception of the war - how it happened, and how it wasn’t going to be possible to avoid it, because of the inherent evil of slavery and how it was destroying damn near *everyone* except rich white people.
I’M DEAD 😂
WHO WORE IT BETTER???
Dad, obviously.
Shoutout to the people still waiting for their Doctor. For their Hogwarts letter. For Arthur. For a 1967 Chevy Impala. For Peeta. For their satyr. For season four.
We are the fandoms who waited.
Russell T. Davies' reaction to THORS
Steven Moffat: Hello?
Russell T. Davies: What the hell was that?
Steven: what?
Russell: the Doctor doesn't go around falling in love with people?
Steven: I---
Russell: There's no explanation you can give for that line.
Steven: Well I--
Russell: that makes me think that you didn't even watch the show when I was showrunner. That was literally Series 1-4... Rose. He was in love with her that whole time. He lost her, he was sad, he wanted her back. I mean, he might've said "quite right, too" but His clone, who's literally the half human Doctor, actually said "I love you"... There's no other way to interpret that... Absolutely no other way. He was in love with Rose Tyler...
Russell: Hello? Steven are you there?
Steven: *dial tone*
WHAT IN THE ACTUAL FUCK???????????
bruh.
Steve Rogers did, in fact, realize that something was off when he saw the outline of the woman’s odd bra (a push-up bra, he would later learn), but being an officer and a gentleman, he said that it was the game that gave the future away.
#EXCUSE ME MA’AM BUT YOUR TITTIES ARE NOT CONES I’M CALLING BULLSHIT (via)
No, see, this scene is just amazing. The costume department deserves so many kudos for this, it’s unreal, especially given the fact that they pulled off Peggy pretty much flawlessly.
1) Her hair is completely wrong for the 40’s. No professional/working woman would have her hair loose like that. Since they’re trying to pass this off as a military hospital, Steve would know that she would at least have her hair carefully pulled back, if maybe not in the elaborate coiffures that would have been popular.
2) Her tie? Too wide, too long. That’s a man’s tie, not a woman’s. They did, however, get the knot correct as far as I can see - that looks like a Windsor.
3) That. Bra. There is so much clashing between that bra and what Steve would expect (remember, he worked with a bunch of women for a long time) that it has to be intentional. She’s wearing a foam cup, which would have been unheard of back then. It’s also an exceptionally old or ill-fitting bra - why else can you see the tops of the cups? No woman would have been caught dead with misbehaving lingerie like that back then, and the soft satin cups of 40’s lingerie made it nearly impossible anyway. Her breasts are also sitting at a much lower angle than would be acceptable in the 40’s.
Look at his eyes. He knows by the time he gets to her hair that something is very, very wrong.
so what you are saying is S.H.E.I.L.D. has a super shitty costume division….
Nope, Nick Fury totally did this on purpose.
There’s no knowing what kind of condition Steve’s in, or what kind of person he really is, after decades of nostalgia blur the reality and the long years in the ice (after a plane crash and a shitload of radiation) do their work. (Pre-crash Steve is in lots of files, I’m sure. Nick Fury does not trust files.) So Fury instructs his people to build a stage, and makes sure that the right people put up some of the wrong cues.
Maybe the real Steve’s a dick, or just an above-average jock; maybe he had a knack for hanging out with real talent. Maybe he hit his head too hard on the landing and he’s not gonna be Captain anymore. On the flipside, if he really is smart, then putting him in a standard, modern hospital room and telling him the truth is going to have him clamming up and refusing to believe a goddamn thing he hears for a really long time.
The real question here is, how long it does it take for the man, the myth, the legend to notice? What does he do about it? How long does he wait to get his bearings, confirm his suspicions, and gather information before attempting busting out?
Turns out the answer’s about forty-five seconds.
Accepted as truth.
It would also explain why they chose that baseball game to play on the radio instead of any other.
Think about it, they probably had hundreds of game recordings that took place after the crash at their disposal to have playing when he woke up and yet they chose that one. If they were really trying to trick him into thinking it was still the 40s it would have made sense to play a tape that Steve had never seen or heard about before (i.e a game that took place right after the crash). Instead they chose one that he actually attended. There is no way SHIELD were that sloppy, this was no accident. They chose a game they knew Steve would recognize. One that he already knew the out come for. One that when he heard it, he would automatically know something was wrong.
Everything here was carefully planned and thought out and I love every bit of it.
Headed cannon accepted
what the fuck. theres not even a fucking joke here. its just the fucking alphabet. i was expecting some kind of fucking meme like “gun” or “john cena” or something like that but no its just the fucking alphabet. here. on tumblr.com. 26 users just fucking banded together to write the alphabet. what the fuck, man.
I think the update broke them, and almost everyone else.
16
23
29
32
40
54
If your religion doesn’t challenge you to care for people you might otherwise be dismissive of and, instead, reinforces your negative feeling about them, you don’t have a religion – you have a formalized structure for institutionalizing your biases.
The Rev. Mark Sandlin (via notalwaysluminous)
Santorini - Greece by Jim Nilsen
Please don’t delete the link to the photographers/artists, thanks!
I want to go back so bad
Lego Jurassic World
This is quality advertising right here.
Dying
[video]
Yes
[video]
If the Earth rotated from east to west instead of west to east, would our seasons still be the same?
Yes…and I’m trying to figure out if /everything/ would be the same. Most things would, but weather patterns would be different. Different places would get rain, and some places might be hotter or colder but overall (I think) it would be pretty much the same…
What if we rotated north to south?