Source
Source
That last fucking sentence.
styofa doing anything
art blog(derogatory)
ojovivo
h
RMH

roma★
No title available
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
occasionally subtle
Stranger Things
noise dept.

tannertan36
Cosimo Galluzzi
Misplaced Lens Cap
d e v o n

JBB: An Artblog!
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ

祝日 / Permanent Vacation
Monterey Bay Aquarium
dirt enthusiast
seen from Spain

seen from Taiwan
seen from France
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Canada

seen from United States

seen from Italy

seen from Malaysia
seen from Morocco
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from United States

seen from United States
@oatmealdinosaurs
Source
Source
That last fucking sentence.
How do I petition congress to pass legislation regulating headlights
LEDs are illegal, especially ones that flicker, that shit is so fucking distracting and triggers my migraines.
There will be a max color temperature headlights can be; aka, they will only be allowed to be warm colors, aka, white and blue fucking headlights will be illegal.
There will be a maximum lumens level set for regular night headlights. I refuse to be blinded.
4. They will be CORRECTLY ALIGNED. as in TILTED TOWARD THE ROAD not DIRECTLY AT MY EYEBALLS
james norrington + being a royal bitch (inspiration)
#as a grown woman i realize that he was easily #the most fuckable guy in these films
@lotr20 | Day 5 ↳ Loss: Éomer losing Éowyn
Then suddenly he beheld his sister Éowyn as she lay, and he knew her. He stood a moment as a man who is pierced in the midst of a cry by an arrow through the heart; and then his face went deathly white, and a cold fury rose in him,so that all speech failed him for a while. A fey mood took him. 'Éowyn, Éowyn!' he cried at last. 'Éowyn, how come you here? What madness or devilry is this? Death, death, death! Death take us all!'
There’s some common threads I see in the anti-voting posts going around, and I feel like I need to discuss some of them. Let’s start with the biggest one:
Voting to punish evil. I see lots of variations of this. Biden is supporting Israel, therefore we can’t vote for him. Is there any viable candidate who would stop the genocide? I don’t think the anti voting crowd actually cares. They are appealing to moral feelings rather than political strategy, because strategically, you have to realize that voting is not going to change foreign policy, and that change has to be pushed by other means. It’ll probably be something in the long haul.
Democrats should run someone else. First of all, this is a shit strategy. You don’t primary your president in the second term unless your party is falling apart. This may come from people from countries where replacing the head of government is easier, but the POTUS is the de facto party head. Also, going to the lack of thought to the goal — do you know someone willing to primary Biden and able to win who would do the things you want.
Biden hasn’t done anything anyway. This is just a way to bat away pro arguments. There’s plenty of lists of progress on lots of things. Student loans, insulin price caps, regulations, anti-trust.
Putting the entire Palestinian genocide on Biden. I’m not saying there’s not culpability there, but understand that the entire US government is in support of Israel, on both sides. It was a miracle we got a handful of Senators to call for investigations. We should cut off aid, absolutely. Who’s running to do that? And keep in mind that Israel chose to engage. US officials would have liked a more limited response, not out of care for Palestinians, but because they know from experience that it will come back to bite Israel in the form of newly radicalized Hamas recruits.
Liberals just have no hope for change. This is a new one. Just some idea that people are stuck in a rut and that’s the reason the two party system exists. The two party system is a mathematical consequence of the way we vote. There is reason to hope for change. The change, though, whatever means you choose, will take decades. Keep working at it. The hope is not that this election will fundamentally change things. The hope is that many small political actions over the years will push things forward.
Funnily enough, I haven’t seen a whole lot of third party promotion, just lots of this rhetoric aiming to punish. When voting, ask yourself:
Is this problem I have with this candidate something that the other candidate would be better on?
Are there other political actions I can take that will help?
What things can change with a different President or Congress, and what needs to be pursued by other means?
Withholding your vote as a punishment isn’t really going to help. Biden doesn’t know who you are or why you are not voting for him, and there is no one with a chance of winning that will do everything you want. But you have other means. Protest, organize, donate, build up alternatives, advocate for a different system.
Vote to give yourself space and get a little bit. Do other things to keep things moving.
I saw a post on BlueSky that said that if Biden loses, the party will see that his centric policies (including international policy) have failed and will therefore move the party further to the left.
I cannot stress how much this will not happen. The party attempts to shift to the center when there is a major loss, because they want to pull in the left leaning-independents and the center leaning-Republicans. The Democratic party pays attention to the left when the left is pulling in victories. They go where the votes are. Not where the votes aren't.
You can go fucking nuts at the primaries, though. If some otherwise ignored candidate starts racking up the numbers, the Dems will pay attention and may focus on that candidate's pet issues in the general election. They'll also be watching where the donations are going.
Not to sound like I was raised by protestants, but I think those kids who argue that it's animal abuse to put working dog breeds to work doing the tasks they were bred and born for have simply genuinely never encountered the concept that they, too, could be genuinely happier if they could do work they found wortwhile and enjoyable. Like engaging in useful and constructive activities might genuinely make life better than a life of doing absolutely nothing because nobody's making you do anything.
Blue Heelers are herding dogs. When I had one, he decided his job was to herd our flock of cockatiels. I didn't ask him to, and in fact tried to dissuade him at first, but it worked out pretty well and kept him from getting bored. Not sure how well things would have worked out if we hadn't had something for him to herd and protect.
If you don't give your working dog a job, they will assign themselves one. Unfortunately, that job may sometimes be eating the couch.
The difference between a well-trained herding dog and an untrained herding dog is that a well-trained one won't start herding before you tell them to, and stops herding when told to do so. Herders will herd because herders must herd. I was there the first time my sister's dog (a shepherd breed) saw sheep for the first time. I swear I saw him blink like he suddenly remembered something, and instantly knew what to do. Genetic memory just clicking into place.
Everyone deserves to experience that at some point in their life. Blinking like a sheep dog seeing sheep for the first time. "Oh, right, so this was what I was supposed to be doing."
I love me a pseudo-historical arranged marriage au but it always nudges my suspension of disbelief when the author has to dance around the implicit expectation that an arranged marriage should lead to children, which a cis gay couple can't provide.
I know for a lot of people that's irrelevant to what they want from an Arranged Marriage plot, but personally I like playing in the weird and uncomfortable implications.
So, I've been thinking about how you would justify an obviously barren marriage in That Kind of fantasy world, and I thought it'd be interesting if gay marriage in Ye Old Fantasy Land was a form of soft disinheritance/abdication.
Like, "Oh, God, I don't want to be in this position of power please just find me a boy to marry", or, "I know you should inherit after you father passes but as your stepmother/legal guardian I think it'd make more sense if my kids got everything, so maybe consider lesbianism?", or "Look, we both know neither of our families has enough money to support that many grandkids, so let's just pair some spares and save both our treasuries the trouble".
Obviously this brings in some very different dynamics that I know not everyone would be pinged by, but I just think it'd be neat.
This is actually a really cool variant solution to a real historical problem, wherein either primogeniture or other profoundly shitty customs led to wealthy parents having insufficient resources to provide for all of their children in a manner consistent with their station.
Historically, the Church and its widespread monastic structure functioned as a dumping ground for second/third/etc sons and all the daughters one can't afford to marry off adequately, with the military eventually picking up the slack for the former post-Reformation to the point where it's been argued that the need for something to occupy these dispossessed sons played a role in Europe's ongoing conflicts between its nations and the eventual push of imperialism and colonization over the rest of the world.
In a world where homosexuality were more accepted, it would offer a new option: spare a comparatively-small outlay of resources from the main family fortune to equip a house and accoutrements, which would be reabsorbed into the family as a return inheritance in a few decades, and contract a marriage which would be deliberately unable to produce legitimate offspring.
You get the advantages of creating marital ties with another wealthy family, the people married therein have a spouse and the status achievements that go with marriage, and the risk that your child goes off and marries someone unsuitable or inconvenient is removed entirely, as is the risk that they could marry someone and have legitimate, inheritance-claiming children with them. Sure, they can have affairs and thus get children if they're married to a same-sex spouse, but those children cannot be passed off as legitimate issue of the marriage, and so they pose less of a threat to the the main body of the family's wealth.
And, thus: perfectly reasonable reason why your pseudohistorical fictional characters can find themselves in a same-sex arranged marriage!
"Nicholas, we've arranged for you to marry Eric, in the neighboring kingdom."
"But father, I'm not...."
"I'm well aware. I've just decided that you shouldn't reproduce."
a lil study of lady septimus as a charles courtney curran painting to get the digital art muscles movin
close up
Alecto postponed means more time to gaslight myself about Anastasia and Alecto
I think they should have a pool scene too
Psych – 6.02: Last Night Gus
Psych 3.11 'Lassie Did a Bad, Bad Thing'
PSYCH | Season 6 Episode 16 ‘Santabarbratown’
I think people need to understand that when someone says the situation in Israel/Palestine is complicated they are not necessarily saying that the discussion of who the oppressor vs oppressed is complicated. The Israeli government has been oppressing the Palestinians for a very long time, that is clear, and it is not complicated to understand that at least since the 80s they have had dramatically more financial and military power to keep control of the territory in the way they like.
However, it is reductive and dismissive to insist that there is no complexity in the potential ways to move forward to bring peace to the region. Despite what people on tumblr.edu like to believe, "Israel should never have been created" is not a practical solution to an incredibly heated geopolitical situation in the present day. Israel was created and it does exist. 10 million people live there. 74% of the population is native born and the country has existed for 75 years. Hand waving these fact away with the opinion that "they should move back to where they came from" may make you feel good about being a Radical Leftist, but it does not give anyone a road map for how exactly millions of people without dual citizenship are supposed to just up and evaporate. Nor does it acknowledge the reality that 21% of Israelis are Arabs, the very people you are claiming to want to give the land back to.
Insisting that there's nothing complicated about expecting an entire country's population to willingly dissappear with no consequences is not a productive way to think about this conflict. It ignores the many massive superpowers that have an interest in proping up different states in the region, the power dynamics involved in any land back movements, and the inevitably negative consequences of totally dissolving an established state without a plan. It is also completely and almost comically unrealistic, so much so that it makes it hard to believe that anyone who's opinion starts and ends with this idea really gives a shit about anyone who lives in the area as much as they care about their online leftist clout.
There's nothing complicated in understanding that the Israeli government is and has been maintaining an oppressive apartheid state for decades. It is, however, very complicated to come up with a realistic way to resolve some of the most intricately entangled land disputes on the planet without plunging the region into total chaos. Not everyone has to be deeply educated on every geopolitical situation, but it is very hard to take people seriously when they know nothing about the politics or history of a region and yet insist that there is nothing complicated about it at all.
There's a lot of people on this website who are getting dangerously smug about their own ignorance, and are starting to go down Qanon type anti-intellectual paths in the name of being sufficiently radical. Not knowing the details of a very convoluted land dispute isn't something to brag about online as you call for intentionally reductive solutions. You can support the Palestinian cause and be aware of the oppression they have faced while also holding off on calling people trying to do real analysis and de-escalation work bootlickers. We need to get control of the urge to fit every global issue into a simplistic YA novel narrative structure that appeals to Western revolutionary fantasies.
Absolutely this. The complexity of the situation is not about the killing.
"Israel should never have been created" is not a practical solution to an incredibly heated geopolitical situation in the present day. Israel was created and it does exist. 10 million people live there. 74% of the population is native born and the country has existed for 75 years.
dialectics
Fellas, is it counter revolutionary to eat.
"Un-uhlaive? UN-UHLAIVE? Ma'am, that man has been killed. He has been MUHDUHED. To DEATH."
i am legit crying here
Aaaaaa, the noble idiot part of the narrative is here. Unlike most everyone else, I love that trope, so I am eating it up.
You broke a demon, lady!
In this case, it is the opposite of "loose lips sink ships" WW2 slogan. Only thing better than noble idiocy is noble idiocy that is brief.
I am SCREAMING!!!
This is EVERYTHINGGGGGGG
OH MY GODDDDD!!!!!