The nativity scene at Claremont United Methodist church
okay, yeah, you know what claremont united methodist church, i can respect that nativity.
you have to add this
@heresylog
KIROKAZE

Kiana Khansmith

titsay

Jar Jar Binks Fan Club
The Stonewall Inn
Noah Kahan

izzy's playlists!
No title available

Andulka
Xuebing Du

oozey mess

Love Begins
No title available
sheepfilms
Show & Tell
🩵 avery cochrane 🩵

Origami Around
untitled
Misplaced Lens Cap
cherry valley forever
seen from Brazil
seen from Lebanon

seen from Bangladesh
seen from Canada
seen from Pakistan

seen from Qatar

seen from Malaysia

seen from Italy
seen from Colombia
seen from Morocco

seen from Brazil
seen from India
seen from Argentina

seen from Tanzania
seen from Colombia
seen from Singapore
seen from Canada

seen from Türkiye
seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from Türkiye
@oh-my-it-spoke
The nativity scene at Claremont United Methodist church
okay, yeah, you know what claremont united methodist church, i can respect that nativity.
you have to add this
@heresylog
by Emily Stevenson Brumbelow
Spirit: Stallion of The Cimarron & the Indian Boarding Schools/Residential Schools allegory
Holy shit!
Was this intentional?
Considering the rest of the film’s heavy anti-colonization messaging, the main antagonist being heavily modeled on & inspired by General Custer, the other main (human) protagonist being a Native man (& the fort is where Spirit meets Little Creek), yes, most likely
YES. It was 100% intentional. I highly recommend reading up on the making of this film. There was an incredible amount of care that went into the development.
They had Lakota consultants for the project, especially regarding the use of the Lakota language in the film (which is used sparsely, but when used is accurate).
It’s par for the course now to consult people belonging to a culture for projects representing it these days (i.e. Moana, Frozen 2, etc.) but it certainly wasn’t when Spirit came out in 2002.
This film is allegorical to its core.
So here's the deal:
You drive. I sit in weird positions in the passenger seat info dumping my latest hyperfixations and rubbing the back of your head.
Please and thank you.
Katya Lepkova
Connemara in a Garden
oh so people have been making their nails look like pretty and polished stones, why am I only finding this out now!!!
©Wildrootsfarmllc on Instagram ❀ུ۪
Saying "voting doesn't matter" might reach your younger peers online but it certainly hasn't reached Clangus Hargbarg who was part of the kkk in 1951 and still sends in his ballot. He hasn't missed a one.
I was reading a post about dipping baby carrots in ranch, and it reminded me of what I've previously described as an Additive vs. Subtractive approach to nutrition.
The Subtractive view looks at all the things you're currently eating, or might eat in a given day, and sees a pile of Bad Stuff, with probably some Good Stuff mixed in, which would be better if only you could clean off and remove the Bad. The Unhealthy, the Fattening. So this outlook sees the carrots as Good, and that ranch is Bad, so in order to eat well, the thing to do is remove the ranch.
(I fear I've gotten in too deep with capitalizing Things for Emphasis, so I'm going to back off on that now. You get the point - foods are not *actually* fundamentally good or bad, they are just categorized that way.)
Dipping carrots in ranch is not a healthy food choice, because the ranch is unhealthy. The ranch has "cancelled out" the carrots, by adding all that fat and processed sugar & stuff, so it would be better not to have eaten that at all. Subtractive nutrition is very concerned with lessening the Bad things: calories, fats, trans fats, processed ingredients, carbs, sugar, salt, meat, non-organic foods - whatever their current trend of "healthy eating" says will kill you.
On the other hand, the Additive view (which I think is more sensible) looks at the carrots & ranch snack and says, you ate some carrots! Carrots are objectively good for you, and you got that nutrition into your body. Good job! Sure, you also ate ranch, which nobody thinks is a health food, but a) the carrots are still definitely in there, nourishing you, and b) the ranch made you more likely to eat them, and enjoy them, and so eat them again in the future. Ranch also provides essential nutrients, regardless of whether it's the ~optimal~ way to get them.
Additive nutrition looks at your day and sees what nutrients you consumed, any that are helpful. Any good choices you make, regardless of if there are also bad ones. What's good, and maybe let's not go overboard on "Bad" stuff if we're really worried about it, but what did you eat that helped you? Eat food that serves you, and if you can put in more good things that's great! But if you have ice cream afterwards, it doesn't rip the kale out of your stomach. It just means you had ice cream today, and also you had kale.
And while Additive thinking helps with motivation, because it gives you little mental gold stars for lots of things, and doesn't take any away or call for shame if you do eat all the nachos, it really comes into play in decisionmaking, and weighing options. Subtractive thinking says, don't eat broccoli with cheese sauce, the sauce is bad for you. Just eat the broccoli, plain, steamed, with maybe a little low-salt seasoning mix. But let's be real - you're not going to do that. Or at least, not very often, not if you're starting from "I don't like broccoli unless it's covered in cheese sauce". Subtractive thinking says take ALL the bad stuff out, and make only the Correct choices, and then you're being healthy. Otherwise you might as well not have bothered.
Additive nutritional thinking says the broccoli with cheese sauce is adding broccoli to your diet where it would not otherwise have been. It's not a choice between plain broccoli and cheesy broccoli, not really. Really the choice is, do I add some broccoli to my diet today, along with tasty sauce, or do I not eat broccoli at all, because that's what I would be doing otherwise?
nothing makes me cry like the embankment tube station voiceover story !!! nothing !!!!!!!
embankment tube station voiceover story ❤️
Gotta make money somehow
The older this gets the funnier it is
Why are you promoting drug use on your blog
stop being funny on my own post
i don’t even know how to explain to non musical theatre people that we genuinely just lost shakespeare — i can’t even think of another comparison that may even remotely come close. there was no one like him and there never will be. a league of his own, the greatest of the greats.
#this sounds so dramatic but it’s true #like the sadness isn’t even for his death #because he was fortunate enough to live a long life and accomplish more than he dreamed #it’s the enormity of who he was and what he meant to the landscape of musical theatre #there’ll never be another person like him that’s for sure (via @desireearmfeldt)
the thing is, this absolutely is true - his impact on art, music, culture, literature is immeasurable, and it transcends the theatre itself. if you read the tributes coming in today, they’re not only from the Broadway community, they’re from pop artists, from authors. he IS the closest thing we have ever had, will ever have, to a modern day Shakespeare. he transformed the idea of what could be done and written about onstage, and he did it with intense humanism and expression in the weaving of his words and melodies. he transformed what was considered typical writing and sound for musicals, incorporating different styles, new approaches, discord and harmony, complex narrative dialogue set to music, internal rhyme schemes, irony and earnestness, Romance in the traditional sense. his study of the human condition is unmatched in many ways because it is immersed in love and grief, in criticism and comedy, and, ultimately, in empathy. there will never be an influence like the elevation and indelible imprint he leaves with us.
When Morticia Addams said, "Life’s not all lovely thorns and singing vultures, you know," and, "Hearts are wild creatures, that’s why our ribs are cages."