Everyday life of Pokemon
Animation by おしるこ | IG

No title available
art blog(derogatory)

tannertan36

Janaina Medeiros

#extradirty
Cosmic Funnies
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH
Three Goblin Art

roma★

祝日 / Permanent Vacation
Xuebing Du
noise dept.

shark vs the universe
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
🪼
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
Peter Solarz
DEAR READER
occasionally subtle
h
seen from Germany

seen from Malaysia

seen from Netherlands
seen from United States
seen from Germany

seen from United States
seen from China

seen from Colombia
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 United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
@riley-louis
Everyday life of Pokemon
Animation by おしるこ | IG
Mostly I'm watching black people I know express distaste with non-black people ignoring the context of what happened, thankfully no one I follow is clowning where I can see it.
But I'm watching arguments about 'toxic masculinity' (can you call defending your wife from someone being a dick to her 'toxic masculinity'???) and 'male violence' (I know PLENTY of black women who would backhand someone talking about them like that) and 'abusive' (fellas is it abuse to defend your wife's honor in a way you likely were taught yourself?) etc etc and they're all ignoring the actual context of what happened.
A black man who knew better made an offensive and ableist joke about a black woman's medical condition that drastically changed her appearance and caused her to sacrifice something culturally important to her, on live TV in front of an audience, and her black husband got on stage and confronted the problem the same way it would have played out if this was not a televised event.
It's wild to me that people aren't connecting the dots. "He shouldn't have used violence" sure and Chris Rock shouldn't have made the joke but he did and he got what he knew he would have gotten if he'd said it anywhere else. He was part of that hair documentary. He KNOWS BETTER. I got popped just like that for a comment about a black woman's hair when I was 8. There are lines and he crossed them. And unlike my 8yo self, he knew where those lines were when he chose to open his mouth.
She was in the audience. She was sitting by Will. Chris looked directly at her and pointed at her before making the joke. He knew what he was doing. He watched Will come up to him agitated. And he didn't press charges even though police encouraged him to do so. He knew exactly what he would have gotten for that in any other place.
I mean, he also knows how much he'd come off as a whiny crybaby who dished out but couldn't take it if he did press charges. At the level of scrutiny both of these guys are at, everything about how they're handling this conflict has to be calculated in terms of public reaction, which has layers and layers of observation and scrutiny from both people with and without context.
as you absolutely already know, obv. but like. yes. Rock's douchery had layers and he knew exactly what kind of nastiness he was pulling, and he was executing that nastiness in a venue where he must have thought he could force Smith to observe without being able to do anything about it: Smith was up for an Oscar himself, he had to attend, Jaida essentially had to attend, Rock is on stage--what the hell is Will Smith going to do to him if he makes that joke? The more humiliating he can make it, the more powerful he feels, and yeah, you are correct and he knew precisely what kind of target he was aiming at, because the more humiliating and painful the joke he can make without retaliation from Will Smith the more he can get off on how much power and control he can exert. Which, you know, totally consistent with Chris Rock's everything.
It's an interesting incident in terms of just how much social context layers onto it to underscore exactly how much of an offensive, nasty, asshole Chris Rock was being there--again--and also in terms of how much weight and context hangs on everything Will Smith chose to do and why. As You Know Jaz the standards that even wealthy and famous and powerful black men are held to are so different from what wealthy and famous and powerful white men are, and especially given the weird dynamics of being minority people in a majoritarian institution--there's so much pressure there to navigate, the stakes are so high!
like, I guarantee to you that the choice to slap Chris Rock rather than punching him was a thing Will Smith made an active decision about based on calculations about the signal that sent: how much aggression vs control does he calculate that both Rock, a generalized black audience, and a generalized white audience will see? how much context does he need to underscore? you can see Chris Rock trying to weasel out and make Will Smith look unreasonable ("I said G. I. Jane!") and Will Smith is just totally unyielding. He's got to make sure he comes off as both angry and principled and also completely controlled and it's just, it's such a great example of a thwarted power play on this enormous stage.
pretty sure I'm lecturing the prof, here, obviously, but just--aaaaugh the whole interaction sincerely feels like something that should be preserved in a museum display so that the layers of context can be unwrapped and understood to appreciate all the pieces, and white people making stupid fucking takes that ignore all of the very specific African-American experience pieces of it (not the least that hair documentary that Chris fucking Rock produced if I recall right) are. vexing.
Good god allllllll of this plus some. Again because like, Chris Rock is known for toeing the line of what he can get away with and so, knowing no one defends disabled people and no one defends black women and certainly no one defends any woman made out to be ugly- because there is an implied message of ugliness there.
The Smiths have had a very public eye on the situation with the cheating and so for Rock to stand on stage and point to her and call her "GI Jane" aka an ugly, mannish, brutish, bald woman knowing that Will is still smarting after the hordes of cuckhold jokes he's been subject to... there's this feeling of 'haha your wife's ugly now, you couldn't keep her when she was pretty do you think she'll stay now that she's ugly, maybe you'll cheat now that she's hideous, lol isn't that so funny' to it knowing their marriage problems are very, very much exposed to the public.
There's also the racial aspect of black women especially with shorter hair being called exactly that: ugly, brutish, mannish for not fitting white femininity. And Rock knows, he fucking KNOWS that, that's a racially charged statement to make and he did it anyway and this is why I'm constantly harping on how black people absolutely can further antiblackness despite being black themselves. Rock was raised by a black woman and he has black women in his life and he KNOWS and he chose to do it anyway because he thought it'd be funny and he'd get away with it because who confronts a comedian on live TV and especially at an awards show?
"he just said GI Jane" "it was just a joke" until you can fully understand the full context of that "joke" you will never understand why a lot of black people who saw that had the reaction of "Smith shouldn't have hit him but Rock was wrong for that one" or "if someone talked about my wife like that they'd get more than a slap".
yeah, I just wandered over to another community of mine and the goddamn pearlclutching over "violence is never the answer" there. (I waded in, because what the fuck, you're the same fucking community that went "YEAH GO THAT DUDE WHO PUNCHED RICHARD SPENCER.") At some point we do have to ask ourselves: what speech can we tolerate without directly responding, and what do you do when the person you are trying to deal with is not operating in good faith.
I am just! How the fuck! people.
there's also the layer in which by pulling that, Smith draws so much more attention to how unacceptable the joke is than he would by simply speaking about it. he is so much more emphatic by saying "not here, not now, not where I see." He gets so many more people talking about what an asshole Chris Rock is being, again, and he can hope that enough people explain the layers to really underscore how much Chris Rock knew what the fuck he was doing to people who aren't members of the African-American community that he and Chris Rock share. Like, how do you respond when someone is deliberately being as vicious as they can to you on a shared wavelength that a bunch of observing people don't have access to?
cis people: I'm such an ally to trans people! I love them so much
trans people: great. can you do one thing for us? can you not play the shitty wizard video game? the one where the main enemies are the antisemitic Jewish coded goblins teaming up with the wizard nazis? the game based off of a series with antisemitism, racism, slavery apologists, homophobia, and a nazi getting a redemption? the game that gives money directly to the figurehead of a hate movement that gets children in the UK killed? you know that game? don't play it.
cis people: OMG YOU'RE ASKING SO MUCH OF ME!!! YOU'RE SO DEMANDING!!! I'M SORRY I'M NOT PERFECT!!!
people are missing the point of this post.
this is a game about killing Jewish coded characters after they team up with the literal nazis. there's side quests where you can visit house elves who are slaves, but it's okay because they like being slaves. this game is based off a series filled with antisemitism, racism, homophobia, and more. the lead developer had an anti-sjw alt right youtube channel where he talked about gamergate. money made from this game goes to a violent transphobe who is passing laws to get children killed.
don't play this game. don't buy it. don't pirate it.
DON'T PLAY THE FUCKING GAME
I'm not a gamer and I already have a firm personal policy of never giving Rowling another dime of my money, but holy crap, this is even worse than I realised.
Not just that, but the antisemitic caricature Jewish Goblins not only team up with Nazi wizards, they team up to... lemme check my notes... oh yeah, steal wizard children. The only thing that's missing is the goblins drinking their blood lmao. Like at best they've gone for Fagin, at worst this is active blood libel. Not to mention that the Jewish-coded Goblins are an oppressed class that are limited in what work they can do (other than banking lmao) and what power they can possess, which is why they're rebelling. And it's your job as the player to put down their rebellion to save the status quo. You're literally on the side of the fascists. You are not an ally to Jews or trans people or BIPOC if you play this game. Your media consumption does not inherently make you an ally, but it does discredit you when you can not only overlook active bigotry but financially or culturally contribute to violence against us. Don't play this fucking game.
YIKES
I think I will reblog this a second time
I haven't the slightest clue what's going on here but I'm a fan of the general unhinged energy
I mean the whole damn point of the Nativity story is that the supposed son of God (interpret Jesus how you fucking want, of course) was born to a couple of poor, exhausted peasants in the stable for the inn, and his first bed was a feeding trough for animals. That would nowadays be like a poor couple where the mother gives birth in a parking garage behind the motel because they couldn’t find a better place and nobody else would take them in. It’s a pretty gritty setting, and the idea is that God was reborn in some of the rock-bottom lowest circumstances. The only thing majestic was all the angels and shit, and of course motherly love
I get that a lot of the art portraying Madonna and Child as fabulously wealthy europeans in splendid robes and golden light was meant to glorify God + whichever nobility was sponsoring the artist, and while of course it’s genuinely beautiful art, it just always struck me as horribly missing the point, which is that the supposed son of God started in incredibly humble circumstances, among the kind of people that everyone else looks down on
‘Massacre des Innocents’ by Leon Cogniét, 1824. Although the Feast of the Holy Innocents is in a couple of days time, this painting is still really relevant in that it portrays Mary as how She really was: a scared refugee mum, so fearful that Her son was going to be one of the Innocents killed by King Herod.
My new favorite mordern interpretation is this work, José y Maria by Everett Patterson (http://www.everettpatterson.com)
I had to look at this like FIVE TIMES to register all the layers of symbolism going into the piece by Patterson.
The hoodie as a veil.
Weisman cigarettes
Each of them is haloed by an advertisement sticker.
No Vacancy sign on the motel.
Dove sticker over Maria’s head.
Neon sign with a star symbol also over Maria’s head.
The crown over the ‘Dave’s City Motel’ sign. “New Manger.”
The sign behind Jose’s elbow likely says ‘Herod.’
The wee little plant growing through the cracks at their feet.
It’s like a New Testament ‘I Spy.’ I love it!
Ugh.
New favorite interpretation of the nativity.
The paper at José’s feet has an advert for Shepard Watches Maria’s hoodie says Nazareth High School The sign above José’s head proclaims ‘Good News!’
This is incredible and lovely.
#KEEP THIS ALIVE
here get ur mp3 players ready
By Astor Alexander
Camp Counselor Jason kills (part 2)
Jason also hit the bull’s eye! RIP Sadie you will not be missed~ (TW// gore, blood)
Link to Part 1 the killers are from a Wes Craven movie called “Last House on the Left”.
on age gaps
Right, we gotta talk about this. Elsewhere on the internet I saw an 18yo asking for advice regarding a man in his forties and his girlfriend in her twenties, who had approached the 18yo on Tinder and were intending on her losing her virginity with them.
I was the only one commenting who did not encourage her to go through with this.
There is a lot to unpack here.
I’m going to start by saying, teenagers of Tumblr, I know you’re not going to like a lot of what I say. I’m 31, but I remember being your age and that’s how I know this stuff. I don’t mean any of it as an insult, simply a fact. I want you to be armed with the information to be able to make informed choices about your life.
I want to quickly point out that because it’s the most common occurrence, I’m going to mostly refer to older men trying to get involved with younger women, but of course people of any gender can be abusers and people of any gender can fall prey to that. If you’re a 17yo boy who has a woman in her fifties chasing you, this definitely all applies to you.
So where to start. In the original post that inspired this one, she said “what’s so wrong with two adults wanting to teach another adult about sex?”
Now, an 18yo is an adult. But there are different kinds of adult.
An 18yo is a BABY adult. Adulthood isn’t achieved in one day; it takes time to become one.
Here is a list of things you generally learn between the ages of 18 and 25, probably the most important growing up stage (you know how they say “you really start to learn to drive once you’ve passed your test”? You’re out on your own now, the real learning begins): –how to keep a home liveable, clean and stocked up. –how to support yourself financially –how to physically pay bills, set up services and organise money –how to solve financial problems, DIY problems, emotional problems, and other issues without involving a Grownup –how to cope with illness by yourself –how to cope with a financial Disaster like losing a job –how to talk to Adults who are not your peers without subconsciously seeing them as an Authority Figure –how to have authority figures without subconsciously resorting to obedient child or rebellious child headspace –how to be independent from your parents –how you feel about alcohol, and if you want to use it, how to use it moderately –how to cope with the end of a relationship –how to tell a partner what you want from them, reinforce boundaries, tell them you’re unhappy with some of their behaviour without being afraid it will end the relationship
Those are the things that separate a young adult from a general adult. A lack of confidence and skill in many of those areas makes a person vulnerable to abuse, especially from someone older with an established career and home. Simply put: if someone has resources and you don’t, you subconsciously feel they are an authority figure, and you are not practised in reinforcing your boundaries in relationships, you are not in a position to consent to a relationship with them.
I get it. Teenage and early twenties boys are crap. They’re morons. They love farting and videogames and they treat women like prizes. I accidentally fell into relationships with men all my adult life, but I didn’t know I was attracted to them until I was in my late twenties, and I suspect before that maybe I wasn’t. But if you’re looking for maturity, you won’t find it in a man past his early twenties who is okay with dating teenagers.
Adult men do not just happen to run into young girls all the time. If you see an older man on any dating website or app: he has deliberately set his preferences to show women of your age. My Tinder range is 24-40, and I tend to go “eurgh” at the under 25s anyway. Because those people are in the same period of their life as me, they have similar knowledge, understanding and experience. I have friends who are in their early twenties and they are awesome people. But they also have extremely poor relationship skills simply due to lack of experience and I would not like to date them. And when I talk to people at work who are that age, (once they realise I’m not the same age as them, I’m really babyfaced): they treat me as if I know things purely by being older than them. I’m not a higher authority than them, but if I give them commands, they do it. They ask me questions on the assumption that I know everything a manager would know. I bet they don’t even realise they do this; I didn’t when I was their age. So we know that any older man finding young girls on dating apps is deliberately seeking them; we know if he meets them in the workplace there is a serious power imbalance. Other than that the most common way these guys meet women is by seeking out hobbies and social groups that attract teenage girls, so guess what? Predatory behaviour.
Some of the reasons adult men seek teenage and early twenties girls and women: –younger women probably don’t know what good in bed looks like so they won’t call out the fact that he’s lazy and inconsiderate –they’re easier to groom into putting up with the kind of bad or even abusive behaviour a woman his own age would dump him for –they fetishize youth and innocence because they’re gross creeps who find the idea of willing consent a huge turnoff –they’re sexists who think women are prizes and objects that “expire” at 25 and are somehow soiled by having relationships instead of seeing that woman are beautiful, interesting and fascinating people throughout their entire lives –they are vile people who don’t give a toss about consent or having a relationship with someone who understands what that means and is his equal, and who wish they could date younger but don’t want to go to prison
If anyone dares come to me with some absolute guff about how it’s “just biology” to be attracted to teenage girls no matter your age, consider this: 1) humans can become pregnant up to and including during their forties and they aren’t “most fertile” at 15; they are still GROWING up to 25 and pregnancies in teenagers are dangerous 2) there are millions upon millions of people out there in happy relationships that cannot result in biological pregnancy for a multitude of reasons, and they are attracted to one another anyway 3) if you’re a man who uses Viagra and you’re making this argument I hope you stumble into an unexpected mine shaft.
I think once you get to your late twenties, the gap narrows between you and much older people because you’re experienced at being an adult, and I’m not going to judge a 50yo dating a 30yo unless he only dates 30 and under exclusively. At that point the power difference is minimised and the younger person can hold their own in that relationship. I’m not against age gaps as a concept; I’m just deeply worried about people who are the target of people who are attracted to them BECAUSE they are vulnerable, and don’t realise how unhealthy sexual and romantic relationships with older people are.
I think the obsession with having been “born this way” largely stems from the idea that you need to be “innocent” to be guiltless.
If something is weird then you need to have no control over it, otherwise it would be mandatory to fix it. If I said that I had control over my stimming and could stop it at any time, people would request I do so. Not for my comfort but for theirs. If I said that I had control over my gender and could be something binary or maybe even cis, people would request I do so. If I said that I have control over my sexuality and could make myself heterosexual, people would request I do so. If I said I could control my attraction and could make myself monogamous, people would request I do so. If I said that I could control my disability and could choose to stop a flair up in its tracks, people would request I do so. They would never ask out of the goodness of their hearts, they would always be asking because I was annoying, concerning, distracting, or inconveniencing them.
Diversity is sometimes only tolerated if you have no control. If you have control, rules will be made to stop it. Hair will be straightened, clothes will be standardized, languages will be shushed, interests will be squashed, weight will be lost, and so on and so on and so on. Proving that we were born this way replaces the more obvious, that we’re okay this way. I don’t need to be a helpless victim of my differences to be forgiven for them. My differences aren’t crimes.
Growing up with your starters
Artist: esasi8794 / Twitter
The captions are also really cute, although they mostly describe what’s in each photo:
Bulbasaur: Somehow, nomming on my clothes… has become a weird habit of theirs.
Venusaur: That hasn’t changed now that they’ve grown, but they’re very gentle.
Charmander: It’s my first attempt, but I made a plushie so that he wouldn’t get lonely.
Charizard: That plushie seems to be his favorite even now.
Squirtle: Squirtle’s a bit timid and hides behind me at the smallest things.
Blastoise: Looks like they’re scared of the first Pichu they’ve seen. You’re not really hiding!
@noelle217
This is adorable
They just posted some more!
[source]
And some more!
You forgot these!!!
I’m disappointed that these were left out
SO MANY GOOD ONES AAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
If I ever don’t reblog this, kill me
rb if your account is a safe space for polyamorous people
Holy shit dude
This sounds like... really important? What the FUCK Disney??
They are just straight up not paying loyalties! "Disney’s argument is that they have purchased the rights but not the obligations of the contract."
This is seriously dangerous to creators
Read the letter from Alan Dean Foster:
Dear Mickey,
We have a lot in common, you and I. We share a birthday: November 18. My dad’s nickname was Mickey. There’s more.
When you purchased Lucasfilm you acquired the rights to some books I wrote. STAR WARS, the novelization of the very first film. SPLINTER OF THE MIND’S EYE, the first sequel novel. You owe me royalties on these books. You stopped paying them.
When you purchased 20th Century Fox, you eventually acquired the rights to other books I had written. The novelizations of ALIEN, ALIENS, and ALIEN 3. You’ve never paid royalties on any of these, or even issued royalty statements for them.
All these books are all still very much in print. They still earn money. For you. When one company buys another, they acquire its liabilities as well as its assets. You’re certainly reaping the benefits of the assets. I’d very much like my miniscule (though it’s not small to me) share.
You want me to sign an NDA (Non-disclosure agreement) before even talking. I’ve signed a lot of NDAs in my 50-year career. Never once did anyone ever ask me to sign one prior to negotiations. For the obvious reason that once you sign, you can no longer talk about the matter at hand. Every one of my representatives in this matter, with many, many decades of experience in such business, echo my bewilderment.
You continue to ignore requests from my agents. You continue to ignore queries from SFWA, the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America. You continue to ignore my legal representatives. I know this is what gargantuan corporations often do. Ignore requests and inquiries hoping the petitioner will simply go away. Or possibly die. But I’m still here, and I am still entitled to what you owe me. Including not to be ignored, just because I’m only one lone writer. How many other writers and artists out there are you similarly ignoring?
My wife has serious medical issues and in 2016 I was diagnosed with an advanced form of cancer. We could use the money. Not charity: just what I’m owed. I’ve always loved Disney. The films, the parks, growing up with the Disneyland TV show. I don’t think Unca Walt would approve of how you are currently treating me. Maybe someone in the right position just hasn’t received the word, though after all these months of ignored requests and queries, that’s hard to countenance. Or as a guy named Bob Iger said….
“The way you do anything is the way you do everything.”
I’m not feeling it.
Alan Dean Foster
SIGNAL.
BOOST.
Because you know if Disney gets away with not paying creators, everyone else will want to see if they can get away with it.
First of all, yes to all of this.
But something I think should be highlighted is the difference between the Disney franchise model, and a lot of previous franchise models, and why the Disney model sucks.
If you, say, write an original novel, and it gets published in a traditional publishing house, they will give you a check up front and also pay you royalties, that is, a percentage of the profits the book makes. (If you’re asking “why don’t you get ALL the profit, if you’re the sole author?” the answer is that the editors, typesetters, printers, cover artist, advertisers, and bookstores need to get paid, too; they aren’t producing and selling your book out of the goodness of their heart.) If the book is a flop, you’ll get nothing but the up-front check; if it’s a smash hit that sells a lot really quickly and then gets forgotten about, you’ll get a lot of money in the first year and not much thereafter; if it becomes a classic or perennial favorite you will have a small but steady stream of revenue trickling in for years.
When Disney hires someone to create something for a franchise they own, they do not pay royalties. They never have, to the best of my knowledge. The contract is a strict one off, work-for-hire. You create something to their specifications, they give you a check, and off you go. If the thing you created is the greatest of its kind ever, you don’t get royalties. Disney can profit for the next century, but you don’t get anything. This is legal, because when you signed the contract you agreed to it--you got all your money up front, not tied to the success or failure of your creation. If your creation is a failure, this is a really good deal, because you’ll make more money. If your creation does medium-well, it’s a toss-up, because you might have made more money with royalties, but you might not; and the accounting and business angle is simpler if you get a lump sum vs. dribs and drabs trickling in for the next couple of years. But if your work is a great success ... then not getting royalties for it means the contract was a really terrible deal for you and a great deal for Disney.
But the thing is, Disney has spent the last several years buying up franchises from other people and corporations. And some of those franchises did pay royalties, at least for some authors. See, especially back in the 70s through the 90s, if you wanted a big-name author to write a novelization or tie-in (and thus have a better chance of that book selling well), offering royalties was how you did it. Because sure, there were a lot of mid-list or bottom-list or newbie authors who would write work-for-hire (i.e. payment up front but no royalties) just because they needed the cash. For a newbie or bottom-list or mid-list author, they might actually make more money doing work-for-hire for a major franchise than they would writing their own original stuff. You churn out a novel to their specifications, you take your check, pay your bills, and then go back to writing the stuff you actually want to write. Which is why so many novelizations and tie-ins are mediocre at best. But a major author (who might do a better job, and who would attract readers who otherwise don’t bother with tie-ins and novelizations) wouldn’t take a contract like that because they’d make more money on their own stuff where they would get royalties.
Alan Dean Foster was one of the leading SF/F authors of the late 20th Century. And he had a positive talent for writing tie-ins and novelizations and making them really good. Which is why he got good contracts with royalties to write those books instead of them being work-for-hire, and also why many of those books are still in print and still selling steadily, today, literally 40 years later, decades after most of the other tie-ins and novelizations of that era are out of print.
So even after snaffling up all these other franchises, there probably aren’t too many authors who wrote books that Disney now owns the rights to who are due royalties. And most of the books Disney now owns where the authors are due royalties ... it probably doesn’t matter much because the books are old enough that they haven’t sold many copies in the last decade or so, so it’s a moot point.
I bet that what happened was that Disney doesn’t have anyone on staff who actually handles figuring out who is owed royalties and how much, because ... they’ve never had to deal with royalties because they do everything work-for-hire. So then Alan Dean Foster, one of the few people who a) wrote novels that Disney now owns the rights to, b) is entitled to royalties on them, and c) those novels actually sell enough on a regular basis to generate royalties, starts asking why he’s not getting his quarterly check. And Disney is like, who does this dude think he is, why should we pay him for books that he wrote forty years ago, he’s already been paid, we own the books now fair and square.
Except that’s not what the contract says. And now they’re trying to wiggle out of it.
I hope they get laughed out of court and have to pay not only the royalties but any legal bills Foster may have.
Look out for Camp Counselor Jason! Ki ki ki ma ma ma~
Based off my Camp Counselor Jason!AU
Be careful who you call ugly in middle school
Based off my Camp Counselor Jason!AU