Seasonal greetings from your cat
And done.

bliss lane
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH
Sweet Seals For You, Always
One Nice Bug Per Day

roma★

Andulka

tannertan36
Fai_Ryy
ojovivo
Game of Thrones Daily
cherry valley forever

Discoholic 🪩
No title available

@theartofmadeline
🩵 avery cochrane 🩵
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
Doug Jones
EXPECTATIONS
h
almost home
seen from Ecuador

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from India

seen from Australia
seen from Indonesia
seen from Italy
seen from United States
seen from France
seen from Bangladesh
seen from Indonesia
seen from Philippines
seen from Ecuador
seen from Argentina
seen from Malaysia
@puppyblueao3
Seasonal greetings from your cat
And done.
I HAVE BELLS
I PLAYED THE BELLS SO MUCH IT STARTED SNOWING ON MY DASH
assuming you've enabled 1-8 keys to play the bells, joy to the world is:
87654321
566778
88765543
88765543
3333345
4222234
321865434321
Jingle bells is:
333 333 35123
4444 43333 3223 2 5
333 333 35123
4444 4333 554 2 1
twinkle twinkle little star:
1155665 4433221
5544332 5544332
1155665 4433221
this old man:
535 535
6543234
3451111 12345
5224321
the “dashing through the snow” part of jingle bells:
14321 1115432 25432 66535 14321 15432 22543 666 676521
you can also play two (or more) bells at once, and holding a number down makes the bell "ring" longer
carol of the bells—play the right and left hand at the same time, playing the left hand note at the same time as the right hand note that it's under, and holding it until you hit the next left hand note:
right hand: 8786 8786 left hand: [nothing yet] right hand: 8786 8786 8786 8786 left hand: 6 5 4 3 right hand: 8786 8786 8786 8786 left hand: 4 3 2 1
alternatively, you can play the dreidel song:
535353 355432 424242 454321
Good King Wenceslas
5556552
323455
5556552
323455
8764543
323455
2234556
8764 5--7--5
did he really fall victim to the alt right pipeline or was he already insufferable and just looking for ways to justify his behavior
24 reblogs and 164 likes...people know the truth but fear sharing it. 1 reblog = 1 AMEN
[Shut off last version of this post to avoid possible continual spread of misinformation that was corrected by staff. Reposting clean with corrected info]
So I'm sure almost everyone knows about the porn bot problem by now, so here's a post detailing why it's a problem, and what we need to do about it.
First off, yes, always block the porn bots. Don't be mislead into thinking they're ok to keep around because they 'inflate your follower count.'
Firstly, no one cares about, nor can anyone even see, your follower count. Be free from the shackles that are the bullshit other socials told you was important. Don't let your ego be tied to a number. Having a lot of followers won't earn you any clout here.
Secondly, bots only follow blogs to try and legitimize their malware (and other dodgy) links. This post goes into more detail about that.
Now that that's out of the way, you'll need to know how to recognize a porn bot. This round the template seems to be:
A profile photo of a pretty lady or guy, usually in their underwear, with a similar header photo.
A bio with some combination of: [Age] // [Name] // [Location] // [Emoji] // [Top Bullshit% OnlyFans]
URL consisting of a name followed by a number (i.e: firstlast999)
Typically an empty blog, or if there is content, it's all dodgy links. Visible, but empty, Likes Tab, & occasionally a visible Following Tab.
You likely recognize the pattern.
So, what you want to do is, first, report the blog as spam On mobile it'll look like this:
On mobile you'll need to report spam first, and then go back to the menu again to block.
On desktop it will look like this, and unlike mobile, you'll be able to report spam and block in the same motion:
If I remember correctly,* be sure to "Report Spam", not "Report sexually explicit material" to feed the bots to the proper channels. Because the blog is empty, they haven't posted anything explicit that would violate TOS. However, staff can recognize a bot, and if you report the blog for spam (the actual problem) they'll take a look, more than likely find that the blog is posting or DMing dodgy links, and dispose of it.
And I think that's it. Here's wishing you all a happy and safe blogging experience!
[UPDATE: It was suggested on another post that the bots track your IP if you click on them to send more your way. However, someone from staff corrected and said this is incorrect. They also corrected the 'guilt by association' myth that bots following you can get your blog flagged by tumblr.
That said, that trail all led to another, easier, way to report/block the bots all from your Follower Tab instead of visiting each blog separately, unfortunately it only works on desktop:
(For newbies, click on the little person icon at the top right of your screen and scroll to find the Followers tab under the blog/sideblog you need to block a pornbot from.)
*I remember this information from a blog that used to be all about taking down the pornbots. Unfortunately I do not know if that blog is still active, nor can I remember the URL. If anyone knows what blog I'm referring to, and/or if they're still active, please feel free to tag them so others can follow them for more tips!
Identitifying and dealing with this round of bots. You start to figure out what’s a bot and what isn’t after a couple waves of these.
People can't handle some bitch with an undercut talking about pronouns well I want my rep weirder I want cis people to get scared I want to see 4D chess type of genderfuckery I want genderfluidity I want to see girlfags and boydykes fucking each other do I make myself clear
The kind of transgenderism they let you see on tv is so sanitized and palatable and holding your hand through basic concepts in the year 2022 and the cis are still mad. Well I want to take it further actually. You're weak and you won't survive the winter
by 徐大花xudahua
WHAT THE FUCK
Fuck it I'm bored so here's a ranking of different Peter Parkers by how Jewish they are
Dead last, obviously, is MCU!Peter Parker. This version of Peter is the farthest from comic canon to the point of being almost unrecognizable at times. Also, Tom Holland answered the question "is peter parker Jewish" in a Wired Autocomplete Interview a while back with a very baffled "no", cementing him forever as my sworn enemy. So he's actually the only peter parker who, at least by word of God, is canonically NOT Jewish. -1000000/10
Next up is Tobey Maguire's Peter Parker. I think this Peter is... fine, at least he's much closer to comic canon than MCU!Peter, but honestly that's not saying much considering how far the MCU strayed from comic canon or even the spirit of comic canon. But like overall, Sam Raimi's movies just aren't particularly interested in presenting Peter as Jewish, so, eh. 1/10
By far the most Jewish of live action Peters is TASM!Peter, also by far the most comic accurate of live action Peters. I'd be remiss not to mention the fact that Andrew Garfield is Jewish, and he understands the character so fucking well. He stated on record that he played Peter as Jewish and that he sees Spider-Man as an inherently Jewish character:
However, the Webb movies still do not textually define him as Jewish, and the best parts of Andrew's Peter's Jewish subtext are better when viewed in light of the comics. Overall, 6.5/10
Next up is the original, our beloved comic book Peter, pictured here saying Happy Hanukkah in a panel from Matt Fraction's Hawkeye. Comic Peter is one of the most heavily Jewish coded comics characters of all time, which is saying something considering how Jewish comic books are as a medium. Obviously he was created and often written and drawn by Jewish writers and artists, but beyond that his driving ethos and values are incredibly Jewish, and as a bonus he's constantly sprinkling Yiddish and Jewish phrases into his speech, alongside things like the above panel where he outright acknowledges Jewish culture in a scene where everyone else is saying merry Christmas. However, despite the extremely heavy coding, Marvel Comics are fucking cowards, and he has yet to be confirmed Jewish, so I must give him a measly 8/10.
Finally, the cream of the crop, the most Jewish of all Peter Parkers, Into the Spider-Verse's Peter B. Parker my beloved!!! Peter B. is voiced by Jake Johnson, himself a Jewish actor, and is a phenomenally accurate representation of comic book canon - but he also has the unique quality of being canonically, textually, in the actual movie Jewish! It's a bit of a blink and you'll miss it scene, but when we get introduced to Peter B. in his "one more time" segment, we see his wedding to MJ, where he steps on a glass. This is a Jewish minhag - custom - meant to represent the destruction of our Temple and Jerusalem, as well as remind us that sorrow and joy come intertwined, and is one of my personal favorite Jewish customs. It's a phenomenal moment in the best Spider-Man movie, and while this version of Peter would have been my favorite film version regardless, his Jewishness absolutely pushes him even further up. 13/10, no complaints
How do you write healthy parent-child relationships?
this might be more response than you want, but interesting (and kinda depressing when you think about it) fact: there’ve been a bunch of research studies where parents have been asked what they think makes a healthy parent-child relationship, and they tend to like…not answer the actual question because they think they’re being asked what good parenting is, which is not the same. so they talk about things like helping kids with homework and making sure they eat well. children, on the other hand, usually respond to the same question with stuff that’s literally just the definition of healthy relationships generally. affection, honesty, respect, spending time together, sharing interests. and the real kicker is, objectively, we know that’s the kind of stuff that actually has a much better impact not only on whether or not the relationship is strong and positive but also the kid’s overall happiness and psychological health.
so, if you want to write a character who’s really intent on being a Good Parent you’d have them putting massive effort into making their kid Grow Up Right, worrying about shit like if they have The Right Friends and they’re spending Enough Time Outside. but if you want to write a good relationship, just make parent and kid laugh together and respect boundaries and be emotionally supportive, like you would when writing a solid pair of friends or romantic couple.
No that was actually really helpful and I’m glad you took the time to give a serious response
for my male audience
This is the
Money Cat 🐈⬛
Reblog for good financial luck! 🍀
What the past couple days have felt like
All I'm saying is, if a fic refers to characters by their physical attributes instead of their names or pronouns ("he smiled at the older" "the blonde laughed") when we know who the character is, and ESPECIALLY if the descriptions include "ravenette" or "cyanette" or other ridiculous words--
I'm clicking out of that fic so fast my AO3 history won't even register I've been there.
I am glad you asked. :D
First, if a writer is using the characters' names every sentence -- they're already off to a bad start. Not every sentence needs to clarify which character it applies to, unless you're writing a "See Jane Run" book, lol.
Overall a good rule of thumb is a) don't repeat unnecessary information, and b) only write things that carry the scene.
So for starters, your readers should know who's in the scene, and you can trust them to have at least a little bit of intuition: not every bit of dialog needs to have a tag ("he said/she whispered" etc.) Now, that established: you do use names when doing otherwise would leave it unclear who's doing or saying things. Example:
George grabbed the lid off the pot. "Dang, that's hot!"
Laughing, Sean passed him a bowl. "Just pour the soup, moron."
"You're a moron."
"Says the guy who just grabbed the lid off a boiling pot."
Sticking his tongue out, George filled the first bowl.
It's clear who says what, and if we had just used "he" it wouldn't have been, but we also didn't have to dialog-tag every line. (ALSO. "Said" is not a bad word. Ignore all advice that tells you never to use "said." "Said" is an invisible word and unless you're putting a dialog tag on every line [which you Do Not Need To Do] people won't even notice it. Unlike "shrieked," "whispered," "hissed," "ranted," "whined," etc. Use those words when they'll have punch and impact. Not every dang line.)
But this isn't always how it needs to go.
For example. Let's say I'm writing about a strawberry-blonde elf named Diana and a human bard with black hair named Jerome. I could say:
Diana leaped to her feet, looking excitedly at the ravenette. "Jerome!" Diane said. "This is our chance!"
Jerome smiled at the strawberry-blonde. "Indeed," he replied.
Okay there are.... several issues here. First off, we don't need to clarify that Diana said the thing after we had her doing an action. Trust your readers! They'll know that a "she" here logically refers to Diane, as they know that "he replied" refers to Jerome.
Next, please strike "referring to characters by eye or hair color" from any lists. This is not good. It's not relevant 99% of the time (we'll get to exceptions in a moment) and also, pet peeve: "ravenette" does not mean black-haired. If you've gotta say it, just say black-haired. Ravenette means "a raven, diminuative" or maaaaaaybe "like a raven." Unless you're imitating an 1800s gothic poet, don't do this.
Physical descriptions used as character indicators/pseudo pronouns are clunky and take up space without telling us anything new. They distance the reader from the character by taking us out of the story and back into exposition land, and they generally repeat information we already know. We can tell our readers in chapter one that Diana has strawberry-blonde hair, and then we don't need to refer to her as "the strawberry-blonde" a hundred more times because our readers already know this. Just call her Diana. Or "she." (Unless it's relevant to the moment -- if she's not our POV character and we need to contrast her to, say, a black-haired beauty at the ball through someone else's eyes, that's one thing. But still, don't continually refer to her by something as shallow as her hair color.)
Exception: visual descriptions are valid to use as character-indicators when we or the characters do not know who that person is. For example, if Diana had been kidnapped by bandits.
She glared at the taller of the two men, who appeared to be some kind of leader. "What do you want?" she spat.
He leered at her, and nudged the filthy blond man at his side. "Ain't she cute," he said. "I like elves. All feisty, they are."
The blond looked uncomfortable. "Whatever you say, Gorm."
Ooooh look! Now we know the boss-man's name. From here on out, we probably should refer to him as either "Gorm" or "the bandit leader" -- not "the tall man" (and never just "the taller." Or "the older," "the younger," etc. That's a side note, but a lot of fics do that too. If you're going to use a comparative adjective, you at least still have to tell us what noun it refers to.)
Also -- did you notice how we never said Diana's name there either? She's the viewpoint character, so unless another person comes along that we need to clarify with, we can usually get away with just saying "she." The reader knows who they're reading about.
When you DO have two or more characters with the same pronouns in a scene, you gotta get creative. Again, readers are intuitive -- they can follow pretty well who's doing what as long as you make it clear. Generally speaking, if you establish which character is doing the thing, you can then use just the pronoun until you switch to a new character. For example:
Diana took the proffered knife. "Thanks," she said. "I was starting to get tired of the stink."
The mysterious rescuer smiled. "No problem," she said. "I'm Peony, by the way." She offered Diana her hand. "Let's grab some horses before the bandits wake up, and we'll get back to Jerome before morning."
"Jerome sent you?" Diana stood, dusting herself off. She wrinkled her nose at the mud stains on her pants, and resolved to buy new ones next time they found a decent tailor.
"Oh, Jerome and I go way back." Peony winked. Sweeping her hair out of her eyes, she motioned toward the horses. "After you."
There's never a confusion that Peony offers Diana her own hand -- not somehow Diana's hand. We don't question that Diana is the one wrinkling her nose, or that they're her pants and not Peony's. Or that Peony sweeps her own hair out of her own eyes. Sometimes you'll have lines where it's a little more confusing, but if it feels awkward in the sentence, always consider if you can re-structure it another way. Like,
Diana kicked her horse into a gallop, heart beating in her chest. "Hold on!" she shouted. Peony cast her a panicked glance, tightening her hold on the rampaging oliphant's saddle. Diana reached for her, grabbing the back of her tunic and yanking her down onto her horse.
Okay, that last line there? That one gets confusing, with all those "her"s. We COULD change it to "Diana reached for her, grabbing the back of Peony's tunic and yanking her down onto the horse." That takes care of a lot of them. Or, we could improve things even further by breaking apart the action, elaborating on things, and just generally stretching out the words so that it's clearer which "she/her" is being referenced at any given time. It's your story! Take advantage of all the room you've got -- there will never be a time when you simply cannot rearrange things to make it clearer for your readers.
It does takes effort. And sometimes a bit of verbal slight of hand. You may have to restructure sentences to avoid repetitive phrases and give yourself a good pace. (That's a large part of rewriting and editing.)
However, like the word "said," pronouns are invisible words. Names are not -- they jump out and say HI THIS IS ME. Use them sparingly -- they have power.
One final exception! Fantasy race and job titles. Again, you don't do this with your POV characters unless you're trying to remind the readers of something, but it IS acceptable to sometimes refer to, say, "the elf," or "the detective," or "the werewolf," or "the duke." Use them sparingly, but this is one exception -- mainly because it tells/reminds us of an important fact about the character. (You might also use, say, "her older sister," or "his father," etc, because that also communicates information about the characters and who they are to each other. But. Again. Use sparingly.)
...okay, I've rambled enough, but hopefully this is somewhat useful/helpful to someone out there.
Again! Read good books! Watch how professional writers do it! Imitate, imitate, imitate! The best writing teachers in the world are good writers.
Happy writing!
wait okay no hold up this says it so much faster and clearer than any of my rambling above: identifying characters by their visual attributes tells us WHAT they are, but not WHO they are.
There. Boom. Short answer. Much clearer, much better. Thank you, tumblr user djtangerine.
yea this is why your exceptions work too! if the narrator only knows a character as “that blond guy” then calling them “the blond guy” isn’t jarring to the reader.
Since I’m back on tumblr I thought I’d repost my old comic from 2018. A lot of things have changed since then and sometimes a dried out ‘never give up’ doesn’t quite hit anymore. But even when burnout sometimes feels less heavy, this brings back some hope.
thinking about whale falls
(inspired by the work of @catadromously )
[ID: a comic about death in nature.
The first two panels show a doe, first alive and looking at the viewer, then laid out on the ground with ribs and bloody innards exposed, with crows picking over its carcass. In both images, the deer is somewhere verdant and green, and sunlight filters in gently. The text reads, “When you die on land, you die where you lived. You feed your neighbors.”
The other panels show the body of a whale sinking slowly into deep, dark waters, first bright red and bloody, then and rotting slowly away into bones upon which corals grow. The text reads, ”But when you die in the ocean, you fall deeper than you’ve ever been before. Those you feed never knew you as a living thing. Only as a blessing.” End ID]
I'm pretty shocked the fusion news isn't all over tumblr, all over everything, because for the first time there's a light at the end if the tunnel. There's a viable path out of global warming and environmental degradation that doesn't just kick the problem down the road a little further.
To explain: solar and wind are far better energy producers than fossil fules but they still have a fairly substantial environmental impact. Solar panel and wind turbine components have to come from somewhere. And you need well, a bunch of them to produce energy. Both require batteries full of toxic components to store energy for when generation is taking place.
They are, I want to reiterate, much cleaner and safer energies than fossil fule based energy. They are available now and we should be using them. But they are also not truly long term solutions to the need for power, any more than nuclear fission is.
But now there's a way out, a path forward. Humanity bites the bullet and uses solar, wind, geothermic, and hydroelectric to bridge the gap because now it's not an infinite gap. Somewhere in the next 10-50 years we'll probably have a fusion power plant built.
Capitalism will undoubtedly slow things down and restrict this vital technology to the richest countries. I'm not saying the fight is over, I'm saying that a win condition exists at all now.
This is the holy grail of energy. This is energy where we build the plants then basically just maintain them and there is no pollution. There is no having to keep harvesting the Earth, or birds flying into turbines, or requiring massive amounts of components to harvest the energy like solar. This works in dark places, at night, in the desert.
I haven't felt hope for a long time. I am feeling it right now. There is a light at the end of the tunnel and it is a tiny star.
it's still so fucking surreal to me. for so long "fusion" was the word of unrealistic hopes, of far-off dreams that wouldn't happen for a thousand years or more.
but it's not.
we fucking did it. we proved that net-energy-gain fusion is possible and that we have the technology to do it. it's not much - about enough to boil a few kettles' worth of water - but it's still an energy gain from fusion, something only the stars could do before.
there's gonna be tons of pushback. fossil fuel companies will inevitably cry and try to get fusion labs shut down. there's a fight ahead of us, but it's one that i can see us winning. one day - maybe in our lifetime, maybe in that of the next generation - humanity will be powered almost entirely by fusion reactors.
the future is bright, lit by a piece of the sun.
Please.
From the depths of my depressed, unemployed, little black heart. PLEASE.
Scheduled this for my 16th birthday, I don’t want a job but I’ll need one
Gonna need a job to move out of here eventually