^good tags from @archaicfirehydrants
Today's Document
RMH
Keni

Andulka
One Nice Bug Per Day
tumblr dot com
Monterey Bay Aquarium
Alisa U Zemlji Chuda
NASA
Sade Olutola

#extradirty

izzy's playlists!
đȘŒ
Peter Solarz
styofa doing anything
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
Cosimo Galluzzi

if i look back, i am lost

romaâ
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United Arab Emirates

seen from United Arab Emirates
seen from United States
seen from United Arab Emirates

seen from Poland
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Japan
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
@strawberrydragon
^good tags from @archaicfirehydrants
Today's Seals Are: Smack The Baby
People still doing "do you think voting can fix this" memes when the answer to the question "when did voting last end an authoritarian regime" is "two days ago"
Super secret sauce on how to end an authoritarian regime by voting:
you have to actually vote
even if you don't really like the guy you're voting for
Source: I was there
Resist the push for generative AI. Make art.
Source:
Alt Text: Four panels of a comic by artist Joshua W. Cotter entitled "Make Art".
Panel 1: "Art poses a threat to corporatocratic systems because a purpose of art is to remind the individual of their inherent autonomy. Their humanity."
Panel 2: "That is a purpose in direct diametric opposition to that of corporatocratic systems: objectification of the individual for profit and control."
Panel 3: "Generative A.I. is part of an authoritarian corporatocratic effort to co-opt and commodify the creative process to rid the end result â art â of that with threatens its existence â humanity."
Panel 4: "Resist commodification. Defy corporatocracy. Defy oligarchy. Defy their anti-human, anti-life authoritarian movement. Make art." â JWC, 02-10-26
NASA ID: art002e000191, art002e000192
A view of Earth taken by NASA astronaut and Artemis II Commander Reid Wiseman from one of the Orion spacecraft's window after completing the translunar injection burn on April 2, 2026. The image features two auroras (top right and bottom left) and zodiacal light (bottom right) is visible as the Earth eclipses the Sun.
Credit: NASA
Date: April 3, 2026
Gendered parenting is so weird. As a little kid I was a total daddy's girl, I was told I would always try to sneak into the garage, I was always very interested in everything he was doing and would follow him around while he was working, but while my family was never the type to outright say "you can't do that because you're a girl", they simply didn't entertain the idea that I could possibly be interested in cars. Then when my little brother was born, it was just assumed he would become a mechanic like our dad because he was a boy. Even though he, unlike me, didn't like being in the garage much and wasn't all that interested in what dad was doing. Once he got to a certain age, dad started making him help and would drag him away from his actual interests for it, which lead to a lot of arguing and not much actual learning.
Gendered expectations sort of create doubles of children. There's the real child with their actual personality, interests and behaviors, and then there's the Gender Child.
My real brother hated soccer and team sports. The Gender Child that existed only the minds of the adults in his life needed to play soccer because that's what a Boy Child does.
Growing up, I always felt like adults didn't actually know me as a person and they weren't interested in getting to know me. Because they felt they'd already learned everything there was to know about me when they were told "it's a girl".
When I talk about how I never got gifts I actually liked from my relatives (to this day I still don't like getting gifts that aren't something I picked out myself), it isn't actually about the gifts themselves. I don't even remember them. What I do remember is the feeling of being given gifts that were seemingly not bought with the real me in mind. They were for the Girl Childâąïž version of me. The me that adults wanted me to be, not who I actually was.
Welcome to the Far Side of the Moon
A crescent Earth sets behind the Moon.
On April 6, 2026, the Artemis II astronauts flew around the Moon, observing the far side â which we never see on Earth thanks to tidal locking â with their own eyes and with cameras.
See more of the Moon:
if you need me, iâll be sobbing on the floor. humans, man
The beautĂful swedish warship Vasa, which sank 1628
đ· Lovisa BrĂ€mming, Vasamuseet/SMMTF
so happy and free
this is going to be a silly reblog but i have kind of a fixation on animal qualia and the idea of an animal's umwelt, so i ended up wondering whether pudding was actually "enjoying" this.
which meant i went and read about snail brains.
here's the bad news, at least by human standards:
snails do not have anything like a centralized brain. their nervous system is made up of small clusters of neurons (ganglia) that mostly handle very local tasks. they don't have a cortex, they don't build big integrated models of the world, and they almost certainly don't experience things like appreciation, anticipation, or savoring.
pudding is not looking at the sky and thinking it's beautiful.
snail eyes are basically light sensors - they can tell bright from dark, but not form images. snail "taste" is done through chemoreceptors on their tentacles and around their mouth. those receptors don't produce flavor the way ours do; they just detect chemical compounds and sort them into "approach," "ignore," or "avoid."
so there's no evidence that snails enjoy food, or wind, or views, the way mammals do.
and that does sound kind of sad. but then i thought that maybe we are asking the wrong question.
snails do have valence. they detect aversive things (like salt or dryness) and withdraw from them. they detect non-aversive or beneficial conditions (like moisture) and stay extended. when pudding is stretched out like this, it means his nervous system is basically saying "this is safe; nothing is wrong."
if we define pleasure not as our human experience of dopamine and reward chemicals but instead as "the absence of aversion" - a state where the organism is open to its environment instead of defending itself - then this does count as something positive, even if it's extremely nothing like human enjoyment.
pudding isn't appreciating the wind. but his body is registering humidity, safety, and the ability to keep functioning, and that matters to him in the only way his nervous system can make things matter. he does not think "this is great, this is awesome, i love the weather", because he doesn't think in the way we do at all, but the neurological action in his ganglion tell his body that he is safe, that the moisture is an acceptable level, that it's not too dry or windy, and that there's nothing imminently threatening.
i think a lot of the sadness comes from assuming that a good life has to look like ours: full of enjoyment, meaning, and aesthetic experience. but a snail isn't missing those things. its world just isn't built to include them.
snails don't have a sense of flavor. they don't even have tastebuds. this seems like a gimme, right? but again that might be asking the wrong question about what "taste" is. biologically speaking, it's chemoreception. we taste sweet because it indicates high value, high calorie sugar molecules. we taste salty for salt, umami for proteins. so in what way does pudding's chemoreceptors differ from ours instrumentally? we can say "by our human perspective, pudding can't experience "preference" or "savoring" or "anticipation of delicious food"", but from pudding's perspective we have radically overengineered ourselves for the task at hand. pudding can tell what's salty, what's high value, what has the chemicals he needs. the functional outcome is that he can discriminate food souces based on their composition. is that not taste?
so maybe the point isn't "this is sad because he can't enjoy it," but "this is a reminder that minds come in radically different shapes, and value doesn't have to be rich to be real."
rating the ways my family members have referred to me to other people since coming out as nonbinary
my secondborn (my parents)
7/10
sounds vaguely historical but in the way that I'm going to be sent off to war to prevent a succession crisis
potentially confusing to the listener bc the average conversation has little relation to birth order
my sister's, [name] (my aunt)
9/10
direct and to the point!
still very clear about what our family relationship is. I think we can do away with many nouns if this is any indication
my young adult child (my mom)
4/10
it's giving "20 year old minor"
I promise you can just say my kid. it's ok I don't mind strangers thinking I'm like 5 bc that would make me a prodigy for doing stuff like my laundry and dishes in one day and honestly I could use that kind of support
my liberated one (my grandma)
10/10 THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT
completely unclear what my relationship actually is to her. her personal oracle perhaps?
made immensely funnier by her immediately following it up with referring to my brother as her grandson.
guys i have to show you my favorite house of all time. words cannot describe. have you ever wanted a house with a pool because do i have the house for YOU
2 bedroom, 2 bath, a nice exterior. i like the red door and red chimney!
Im always like "i will not add my two cents. i will not add my two cents" but i cant lie the pennies are getting sweaty in my hand
i love this wolf so much i had to draw himâŠ..Â
Sasha the Christmas Tiger has a new friend
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZTdQuxw52/
I think I found my new favorite rabbit hole. This voice actor does Shakespeare scenes in a southern accent and I need to see the whole damn play. Absolutely beautiful
if you're not from the us american south, there's some amazing nuances to this you may have missed. i can't really describe all of them, because i've lived here my whole life and a lot of the body language is sort of a native tongue thing. the body language is its own language, and i am not so great at teaching language. i do know i instinctively sucked on my lower teeth at the same time as he did, and when he scratched the side of his face, i was ready to take up fucking arms with him.
but y'all. the way he said "brutus is an honourable man" - each and every time it changed just a little. it was the full condemnation Shakespeare wanted it to be. it started off slightly mock sincere. barely trying to cover the sarcasm. by the end...it wasn't a threat, it was a promise.
christ, he's good.
the eliding of âyou allâ to âyâallâ while still maintaining 2 syllables is a deliberate and brilliant act of violence. âbear with meâ said exactly like iâve heard it at every funeral. the choices of breaking and re-establishing of eye contact. the balance of rehearsed and improvised tone. A+++ get this man a hollywood contract.
Get this man a starring role as Marc Antony in a southern adaptation of this show PLEASE.
This man is fantastic. đ
The thing that just destroys me about this, though -- we think of Shakespearean language as being high-cultured, and intellectual, and somewhat inaccessible. And I know people think of Southerners as being ill-educated (which...let's be fair, most are, but not the way it's said). But that whole speech, unaltered, is so authentically Southern. And the thing is: Leaning into that language really amps the mood, in metalanguage. I'm not really sure how to explain it except... like... "Thrice" is not a word you hear in common speech...unless you're in the South and someone is trying to Make A Fucking Point.
Anyway. This was amazing and I want a revival of Shakespeare As Southern Gothic.
One of the lovely things about this, and one of the reasons it works so well, is that from what we can piece together of how Shakespeare was originally pronounced, it leans more towards an American southern accent than it does towards a modern British RP.
In addition, in the evolution of the English language in america, the south has retained many of the words, expressions, and cadences from the Renaissance/Elizabethan English spoken by the original British colonists.
One of the biggest examples of this is that the south still uses âO!â/âOh!â In sentences, especially in multi-tone and multi-syllable varieties. Weâve lost that in other parts of the country (except in some specific pocket communities). But in the south on the whole? Still there. People in California or Chicago donât generally say things like âwhy, oh why?â Or âoh bless your heartâ or âOh! Now why you gotta do a thing like that?!â But people from the south still do.
I teach, direct, and dramaturg Shakespeare for a living. When people are struggling with the âheightenedâ language, especially in âOâ heavy plays like R&J and Hamlet, a frequent exercise I have them do is to run the scene once in a southern accent. You wouldnât believe the way it opens them up and gives their contemporary brains an insight into ways to use that language without it being stiff and fake. Do the Balcony scene in a southern accent- youâll never see it the same way again.
This guy is also doing two things that are absolutely spot-on for this speech:
First, heâs using the rhetorical figures Shakespeare gave him! The repetition of âambitionâ and âBrutus is an honorable manâ, the logos with which he presents his argument, the use of juxtaposition and antitheses (âpoor have cried/caesar hath weptâ, etc). You would not believe how many RADA/Carnegie/LAMDA/Yale trained actors blow past those, and how much of my career I spend pointing it out and making them put it back in.
Second, heâs playing the situation of the speech and character exactly right. This speech is hard not just because itâs famous, but because linguistically and rhetorically itâs a better speech than Brutusâ speech and in the context of the play, Brutus is the one who is considered a great orator. Brutusâ speech is fiery passion and grandstanding, working the crowd, etc. Anthony is not a man of speeches (âI am no orator, as Brutus is; But, as you know me all, a plain blunt manâ) His toastmaster skills are not what Brutusâ are, but he speaks from his heart (his turn into verse in this scene from Brutusâ prose is brilliant) and lays out such a reasonable, logical argument that the people are moved anyway. I completely believe that in this guyâs performance. A plain, blunt, honest speaker. Exactly what Anthony should be.
TLDR: Shakespeare is my job and this is 100% a good take on this speech.
definitely one of the challenges I have with reading Shakespeare is that it sounds so weird to me. âThe good is oft interrâd with their bonesâ?? Who talks like that?
Well,,, rednecks. Despite being Elizabethan English, none of this is really out of character for a man with that accent; southern american English has retained not only (I am told) the accent of Shakespeare, and the âOh!â speech patterns, but also so many of the little linguistic patterns: parenthetic repetition (âso are they all - all honorable menâ), speaking formally when deeply emotional, getting more and more sarcastic and passive-aggressive as time goes on, etc.
Someone sent this to me a while ago and I dropped it in my drafts because I wanted to comment on how RIGHT this sounded but I couldn't express why it sounded right, so I'm glad other people have picked it up
There's a theory that Appalachian English in particular retains a lot of the qualities present in Shakespearean english that are now gone elsewhere. Thinking of my Mamaw, who says "twice't" instead of twice and other things like that...
This is right up there with Gary's Cook's Hamlet soliloquy
First of all, this is brilliant acting. Second of all, the language analysis above is great for anyone interested in it. And lastly, this video, to me, does a great job of pointing out the effect of type of media on the story you're trying to tell. Shakespeare's plays work best as plays. Not as scripts, not as movies. Plays.
This is the thing that drives me nuts about Shakespeare always being filmed in RP in the past. The actors weren't upper class. They were working in theatres. They had regional and scattered accents. Shakespeare was from Stratford. THere's a whole bunch of of the rhyming structures in the plays don't work in RP accents, because the emphasis and intonation of a sound is different for people with non-RP accents.
There was an incredible version of Julius Caesar done by the BBC a few years ago set in modern Africa and once again, their accents worked beautifully with the language
there are a NUMBER of folktale Woman-Creatures like selkies who exist to make the inherently coercive nature of heterosexual marriage explicit and to externalize male anxiety about how if your wife had actual autonomy she very well might disappear and you might never fucking hear from her again
which is a FASCINATING category of Woman-Creature imo
someone said it's also a cautionary tale about mistreating your wife and I think that's spot on especially for other related types of stories e.g. the crane wife. like I think these stories are very much Husband Anxiety Stories. the Woman-Creatures are black boxes whose interior experience it is impossible to know and who have strange and often seemingly arbitrary rules that you must follow or else they will disappear. idk. like. that's why I think that any empowering-to-women-ness qualities of these stories is incidental. I think they're externalized anxiety about coercive societal heterosexuality and the inability to truly Know one's wife in such circumstances.
you also see a variant of this formula a lot (generally at the more literary end of the fairy tale space) where it's not a creature you capture, but a magical lady who picks you for seemingly arbitrary reasons, bettering your fortune enormously with her magic and wealth and second-hand status.
and then, for reasons usually at least slightly less arbitrary, fucks off again.
the husbandly anxiety here is more about not having access to coercion as an option.
oooo yes absolutely!
was just talking to Story about this and he told me about one folktale where a guy meets a beautiful woman at a lake and she brings a bountiful dowry of like one million fat cows and such and she is of course a fairy so she's like "my one requirement in our bargain is that if you strike me three times I will leave" and in many versions of the story the husband doesn't ""actually"" strike her -- each time it's something like, one 'strike' involves her forgetting her gloves inside and he walks out and taps her on the shoulder with her gloves, but she tells him that counts as striking her. this sort of thing. which is TRANSPARENTLY like "whoa wouldn't it be fucked up if your wife could enforce consequences for behavior she said was harmful, even if according to your cultural norms it was fine, and you didn't see it as a big deal?" like... lol. what if women could actually be the ones who decided whether or not any given action their husbands took against them was harmful? IMAGINE... PREDEY SCARY....