Alisa U Zemlji Chuda
dirt enthusiast
No title available
ojovivo
pixel skylines
đŞź
AnasAbdin
Love Begins
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
â
Sade Olutola
Claire Keane
Today's Document
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
Jules of Nature
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
titsay
⣠Chile in a Photography âŁ
d e v o n
shark vs the universe
seen from United Kingdom
seen from China
seen from TĂźrkiye
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from Portugal
seen from United States
seen from Belarus
seen from Canada
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Gibraltar
seen from United States
seen from Belarus
seen from Guatemala
seen from Spain
seen from Malaysia
seen from Germany
seen from Canada
seen from Switzerland
seen from Malaysia
@tackedtothewall
[Image description: a tweet from The Hungover Pundit:
âA friend once shared what she called the Parable of the Choir: A choir can sing a beautiful note impossibly long because singers can individually drop out to breathe as necessary and the note goes on.
âSocial justice activism should be like that, she said.
âThat's stuck with me.â
Timestamp 9:12 pm, Jan 14, 2020. /ID]
As a society we have benefited so much from successful public health measures that we now have the privilege of declaring that we must not need them anymore
Bitch before enriched flour, neural tube defects like spina bifida were far more common. Even now, spina bifida clinicians and researchers are begging to have salt and maize fortified to reach groups that donât use as much flour. Before iodized salt, the United States had a fucking GOITER BELT. Eleven years after the introduction of fluoridated water, a city in Michigan found the rate of dental caries among school children dropped a staggering 60%â in an era where tooth decay regularly fucking killed people
Iâm literally not even going to start on vaccines, which are among the most successful and robustly studied public health measures in world history
You might say âoh well today we all have access to vitamins and toothpastes and dentists so we donât need those things in our food suppliesâ and boy do white people on social media loooove to fucking say that. But hereâs the thing: no, people donât all have easy access to those things. Thatâs privilege talking yet again
99% of queer discourse stops right before they define the true difference between bisexual and pansexual!
FOR THE LAST FUCKING TIME
BISEXUALS GROW FROM THE GROUND
PANSEXUALS GROW FROM THE CEILING
Bisexuals grow in jewel tones.
Pansexuals grow in neon tones.
Every time Sean Astin makes a statement on whether or not Sam and Frodo were indeed gay for each other in lord of the rings heâs always like âwell we have to acknowledge that attitudes around sexuality have changed dramatically over the past several decades and since authorial intent is only up to speculation, the story is open to multiple readings, some of which might have different significances for different groups of people also they kiss on the lips because I said soâ
at the rose city comic con panel this month a fan asked them (sean and elijah) if sam and frodo were in love and they said
Sean: .....yes. absolutely
Elijah: 100 percent.
Sean: dont tell rosie
Rosie: "This is my husband Sam, and that's his husband, Frodo. Frodo is my husband-in-law. I'm not into him, he's he's a bit too 'elfy' for my taste, but Sam likes him, and that's fine with me. As far as I know, Frodo can't give Sam children, but Frodo looks after ours all the same, so I don't mind sharing Sam if it means another pair of eyes on the wee ones. In all honesty, our family tree is right simple compared to some hobbits. Yes, I'm referrin' to you Lobelia, over there pretendin' you ain't eavesdroppin'. Still bitter you ain't got either of my boys or their house, eh?"
Tbh it's canon that Frodo invited Sam and Rosie to move in to Bag End after their wedding and they all lived there for a couple of years until Frodo went to Valinor, so yeah. Running with it.
And once Rosie dies, Sam says his goodbyes and disappears after him.
whatâs funny is people assuming that rosie would somehow be too dim or naive to KNOW that sam loved frodo, instead of looking at a guy who would loyally follow a beloved friend to hell and then help carry him home again, and not be like âoh i canât not fuck that.â
Polyamory, specifically polyandry, would be an interesting solution to the oddball population of the Shire.
The Shire is excellent farming country, with consistently good weather, and only one tough winter in living memory; hobbits like to produce large families; theyâre resistant to disease, rarely violent, and encounter few dangers. It is usual for hobbits to produce many children, so that (for example) Bilbo and Frodo are unusual in both being only children, with no siblings, and not having children of their own. All of this should point to a population that increases every generation if not doubling outright. Young people (and their ideologies!) should rapidly outnumber the old with an ever-increasing effect and impact on society. However, the Shire has a surprisingly stable history; it never seems to increase or decrease greatly in population, and the bell curve of age seems⌠demographically balanced? There certainly isnât a conflict from rising young bloods challenging the middle-aged reactionaries; thereâs no unemployment; there are no housing crises or waves of emigration, or even a tendency for young people leaving home to marry. Meanwhile, not only does the Shire not suffer from internal pressures, but it remains obscure and hardly noticed in global politics.
What makes sense here is that adult hobbits form a loose group. Four parents in a polycule, between them all, may produce four children. All four parents claim to have four children. An outsider would assume this meant the adults had eight children.
Hobbits therefore are not especially fertile or fecund. They simply have large families. Much of their interest in genealogy is due to the complex relationships of blood-kin, hearth-kin, love-kin and pledge-kin, who must all be carefully tracked and measured - not just because you need to make sure that you donât climb into bed with an un-permitted degree of blood-kin, but to track family alliances and carefully quantify the precise level of thoughtfulness to put into the proper present to gift your fatherâs loverâs lover (too much implies a degree of intimacy that might upset the polycule.)
Thus, while a hobbit matron may tell a startled dwarf that she has seven sons, she might only have borne five of them herself, and have one hearth-son by her wife, and a pledge-son of her first husbandâs. There are between three and four fathers involved at various stages of production, from conception to pledge-duty, but there is debate about the precise number of fathers, as one child was festival-conceived and therefore provisionally pledged to the Brandybucks until more distinctive paternal traits should materialise. Itâs expected that four of the sons will be uninterested in women, and their contribution to family life will be in raising hearth-children and pledge-duty. However, this level of detail is normally negotiated later in conversation, as a mutual overture of friendship. So sheâs just clear and simple: yes, certainly, she has seven sons. Yes, theyâre all hers. Yes, thatâs fairly normal - yes, hobbits like big families. How big? Thatâs really hard to say! Well, about thirteen hobbits live in her house⌠er, she has forty-three nieces and nephews. Yes! She has nine siblings, thatâs correct, but some of them are still babies themselves..
In this way, a bewildered dwarf might assume that hobbits are absurdly fertile, producing an average of seven children per couple, at an absurd pace.
When in fact, with about half of hobbits never bearing biological children, the population of hobbits is pretty much always the same.
Tl:dr, hobbit population works perfectly well, both internally and in the perceptions of outsiders, if the majority of the Shire is gay, theyâre all polyamorous, and they all firmly claim to be parents of high numbers of children. Of course Frodo fathered Samâs kids - he named them! They were pledge-kin but not hearth-kin, as Frodo needed a lot of quiet and stability in the home.
No outsider ever parses hobbit genealogy well enough to understand this except for Gandalf, who never explains anything either.
are you kidding? Gandalf would WEAPONIZE his knowledge of Hobbit genealogy against outsiders
Since âpledgeâ kinships are multidimensional and can occur in different directions, hobbits can form - and formalise - family bonds simply because they choose to. Gandalf doesnât tell anyone that the formation of Thorinâs Company, the Fellowship of the Ring, and Belladonna Tookâs Accidental Troop of Mercenaries* are legal formations of pledge-siblings, a hobbit family structure usually claimed to increase social class and prestige (as high numbers of pledge-kin confer distinction on a hobbit, being a sort of popularity vote/endorsement that adds greatly to their social power. Incidentally, this is partly why Bilbo was both controversial and successful in his pledge-claim of Frodo; outsiders mistook his âbachelorâ status as someone living outside of heteronormativity, while the Shire was bewildered and increasingly annoyed by his rejection of pledge and hearth commitments. By rights Bilbo had too few pledge-kin, and too little parenting experience, to claim rights to an orphan, especially one from Brandybuck hearth; but conversely, his social status was high enough that his belated bid for his very first pledge-son couldnât reasonably be denied by anybody.)
In short, all of the hobbits enjoyed achieving even larger families on their adventures, legally and without argument or debate. Itâs free real estate. If nobody else is going to sibling these losers, we will. (The condensation of so many entanglements at once also legally made Pippin his own father-in-law.)
Gandalf never explained.
* see the post about the Old Tookâs âenchanted diamond cufflinksâ that obeyed the wearerâs commands; which were probably, given the general state of things, two lost silmarils recovered by his Remarkable Daughters and gifted to him because things stay small and safe in the shire
@elodieunderglass wouldn't that make pippin both denethor's pledge-son-in-law, and (as pledge-brother to the king) probably outrank him?
Only through Boromir while Boromir was alive! Pippinâs familial claim through Boromir technically dissolved on Boromirâs death, as Denethor hadnât been privy to it, and those bonds rarely stretch to a stranger when the person in the middle has died before introducing them; although Pippin, who was well-brought-up, perfectly and politely rectified the problem at once by simply swearing himself as Denethorâs pledge-son. but through his blood-cousinship to Frodo, who was older than Boromir, his status as the Took double-primarc (donât ask) and the proximity-enhanced status-doubling effects of having a five-way cousin in Merry, Pippin was demonstrably higher status as a pledge-sibling and was also his own father-in-law and approved of himself. As such, he would have significantly raised Boromirâs social status and marital prospects in the Shire.
Inheritance follows parent-child pledge as the primary consideration, with matrilineal descent as the secondary. Pippin would have been bewildered to gradually understand that Denethor held his two sons in such odd and different standing :-/ hobbits donât recognise kingship so it wouldâve been very upsetting and disappointing to Pippin to understand how Denethor stood in position of sworn-father to a whole city of people without even being slightly fair to his younger hearth-son. Aragorn is demonstrably much better dad-material and therefore had Pippinâs vote. Pippin, by virtue of being an excellent father-in-law to a spectacularly promising young son-in-law, also considered himself a better candidate for king of Gondor than Denethor, by outranking him in Dad Competence - but was too busy by the time he realized this to point this out .
Ironically, the events in which Pippin realized this made Faramir his own hearth-son - so Pippin won in the end and took a great interest in ceremonially approving of Eowyn. Gandalf never explained
I will buy that for a dollar, yup.
It crossed my dash again! The Hobbit Polyamory Post!
dead serious normalize having an average boring ass life where you have enough to meet your needs we do not need to be remarkable we just need to be alive
I was watching Starships, as you do, and had the thought that surely someone must have made a similar style fanvid for horses.
Many fruitless searches later, I found myself here.
(Also on AO3)
Vaguing someone who pissed me off the other day but also just kind of repeating a general point: If your "but what about disabled people" argument completely breaks down when we factor in the fact that Driving A Car is one of the most common things disability might render someone unable to do, I don't think you have any business accusing walkable city supporters of categorically "treating disabled people as an afterthought"
Hypothetically I could understand scepticism towards biking first solutions, since many new urbanists are extremely pro-biking and US specifically is home to some rancid cycling advocates, but reliable biking infrastructure that de-emphasizes cars would actually help the car dependent disabled people, because they would have less car traffic to disrupt their commutes.
Not even mentioning that wheelchair accessible public transit, transit stops, and spaces are also way better for general walkability than inaccessible ones. And same applies to many other accessibility forward solutions.
MOAR PUBLIC TRANSIT
The Honey Moon (The English Dance of Death, plate 13). August 1, 1814. Credit line: The Elisha Whittelsey Collection, The Elisha Whittelsey Fund, 1959 https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/389684
Work is by Thomas Rowlandson, the artist, was a prolific caricaturist and cartoonist in Georgian Britain.
From the Met Catalog, the inscriptions above the image says "R. Ackermann's, August 1, 1814"; the one below the image reads "When the old fool has drank his wine and gone to rest. I will be thine."
The image shows a (presumably wealthy) old man seated in a very cushioned chair. A skeleton representing death is leaning over the screen and pouring something into the glass the old man is holding. His young wife is reading to him with the book in her right hand, but her left hand is out the window where a fashionable fellow is kissing it.
When you click over to the Met's copy, you can zoom in and see all the little details Rowlandson included. There's the slightly creepy looking dog on the floor, the figurines on the mantlepiece, the musical instrument in the right-hand corner of the image. The screen itself is pretty cool, from a material culture perspective. You can see the young wife's earrings.
Without the skeleton, the wife's statement (from the inscription) might be one of "once he's snoring in a drunken stupor, we can have some fun." With Death there, you wonder if she's added something to the wine...
if we can set aside attachment discourse for a moment (please) i think the jedi marriage prohibition makes sense in a âplease donât enter a complex legal, financial, social, and in some cases religious contract, the specifics of which vary wildly depending on planet and cultureâ way. the single jedi with a law degree does not have time to draft everyoneâs prenups to prevent the whole order from getting sued
#we could create so many interesting new problems if we ignore romance and make it about contracts generally#jedi prohibition on getting a loan. jedi prohibition on signing a waiver before bungee jumping. etc
"Qui-Gon didn't try to buy Anakin or the engine because there wasn't anyone in town who offered a credit exchange service" wrong. Qui-Gon gambled for Anakin under the table because after dealing with the Cyrkon Delinquency of 24850, Master Olobi, Esq, has personally promised to hang by the the toes from the highest tower of the Temple for one week any Jedi who generates any trackable legal transaction or obligation between the Order and the Hutts.
made you some graphics to help you remember
Me, pointing to the mirror: Do NOT become The Joker about this. This isnât even a Condiment Man situation.
Upon reflection, the tendency of Dracula adaptations to treat Jonathan as a bit character is probably inextricable from their tendency to treat the episodes concerning his time in Castle Dracula as a fairly tedious piece of exposition to a story which truly begins with Dracula's arrival in London.
I know this is blasphemy, but I feel like Dracula is the one novel that might actually benefit from being split into multiple films. Do an intimate bottle-episode psychological horror piece covering Jonathan's confinement to and eventual escape from Dracula's castle, so in the next movie we actually have proper context for his whole... everything.
Critically, I feel like it would need to be a pair of films rather than a miniseries because a. as series you'd have to awkwardly work around the fact that most of the billed cast just plain don't appear in the front half of the episode list, and b. a big ominous "To Be Continued" title drop when Jonathan finally escapes followed by making the audience wait a year for the continuation would do fun things to the audience.
Huh? What's this?? Something is on this 5c coin???
ENHANCE
[Image descriptions: The first is a photo of a 5 cent euro coin on top of a ruler. The second is a close up of this coin, showing a very small engraving that has been made on the coin. It says: Average person engraves memes at 0.7 milimetres factoid actually just statistical error. Average person engraves 0 memes at any size. Engraver Dave, who lives in a workshop and engraves bullshit all day is an outlier and should not have been counted. End quote. The type of 'and' being spelled a d n from the original tumblr post has been reproduced in the engraving.]
okay, iâm curious. letâs play a game. reblog this post and put in the tags the name of a fictional Indigenous character.
No headcanons, no âcodingâ, only CANONICALLY Indigenous characters. You have unlimited time. Go.
if another FUCKING person mentions the fucking werewolves from twilight I'm going to burn this whole site down and take you all with me
The first one that came to mind was a girl named Denny from the book lone wolves I remember reading as a teen.
Good reads:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17938378-lone-wolves
Important research for a story I'm writing! Not real life, never real life.
You are transported back in time and into the body of a young noblewoman in the 1400s. Your parents have married you off to an awful, abusive, rapist husband whom literally no one else would marry despite him being very high nobility because he's that terrible. You successfully produce a baby boy and then plan to murder this man for the good of everyone and yourself. Here is the question: do you think you could murder him in a way that is undetectable to the historical people around you? Note: they aren't stupid, you are the prime suspect as the battered wife AND you can't just say poison. Where are you going to buy poison? Do you know anything about poison actually? NO GOOGLING! You were sent back without a plan!
Do you think you could murder someone in the 1400s and get away with it with your modern know-how?
Yes, I totally have a plan (tell me for research purposes)
No, I realize that I'm very uninformed about murder
I have some ideas but I'm not sure they would work
Edit: my notes are full of murder. I love you all
Edit: to clarify about the poison, you can use poison if you actually know how to identify it, I'm saying you can't just go "Poison!" with no knowledge about poison. Buying it probably means they know that poison and you're caught. Your personal knowledge when you read this post is all you have.
Another point of clarity: You went through all that trouble to have a baby without modern medicine so you could get the sweet house after your husband died. That's why you can't be caught. No disappearing.
Edit again: Air embolisms are going on a high shelf because the syringe won't be invented for 350 years. Prove to me that you could make one from scratch, lol
I promise to stop making edits (lol): I left the country vague because I just wanted to see ideas for modern vs. past. Whatever place you are most knowledgeable about
Oh no, she edits again: This man is like 25, not very old. He's not dying of natural causes or even alcohol consumption any time soon. Imagine a university student liver.
Due to way too many people thinking that they, in the body of a noblewoman, can suffocate a drunk nobleman no problem, or push him down the stairs, I had my character try this. Unfortunately, he is way stronger than her and was not suffocate-able. You know people thrash if you cover their airways? Drunk or asleep doesn't stop that. He also became increasingly violent with alcohol. This is a very dangerous plan, in my opinion.
I have started to really wonder if the people suggesting this have ever fought a man as a woman. I have three brothers and I wrestled with them a lot as a kid. They are way stronger than me. They started to be able to overpower me pretty young and I was six years older. Maybe I'm just a weak person, I'm not very athletic, but neither would Miss Noblewoman here be athletic.
I don't know, maybe this isn't everyone's experience, but I find the confidence in this sort of plan baffling. Also, if you try to push him down the stairs and he catches you? You are going down those stairs. You are dead. Game over.
Maybe it's because I didn't specify an age and everyone is imagining this guy as like, old and bloated. He's young and healthy. He will fight back. He's violent! Alcohol and violent man are not a mix you should encourage!
Unrelated note: You aren't making the food. Nobility. Nobility is an important part of this equation.
Easy. If heâs that violent and youâre clearly being battered, you can get someone to help you. People knew abuse was wrong, even if the abuser was nobility. Assuming you have brothers or some other male relative, you can get them to help.
What you do is get rid of him the same way William II of England diedâ a Hunting Accident. For context, William II died out hunting, and itâs pretty clear it probably wasnât an accident. What you do is you tell your brothers whatâs going onâ theyâve probably seen or at least heard (if theyâre not present a lot) what your husband does, and how the threat of losing your dowry hasnât worked on him. Theyâll help engineer it so he gets injured or outright killed in a hunt.
Boars, a common hunting target, are super dangerous, as are harts (fully grown stags). Richard II of Englandâs boyfriend Robert de Vere died from being gored by a boar a few years before (1392), so there are plenty of high-profile legitimate accidents in recent memory. All your accomplices have to do is let him get attacked by an animal and not rescue him, or shoot him with a wayward arrow and let it be an accident.
No one is going to really question it. Especially if he was that visibly awful that youâd be the prime suspect.
âď¸
This is the correct answer for a medieval noblewoman -- hunting is basically THE aristocratic pastime, after all, and if MC's husband is so famously awful nobody else will even marry him, she could probably find some people to cooperate pretty easily, including family (it's a matter of honor after all). Especially if the succession is secure.
A modern person transported back in time wouldn't even have to know too much real-life medieval history for inspiration--she'd have a pop-cultural example ready if she watched Game of Thrones. Which also emphasizes the pivotal role of booze in this kind of endeavor.
Even in a post-capitalist, post-consumerist world, you still need to produce goods, as a result of this, you need factories because it is more effective to have a few people making a lot of clothes in a factory than every woman being forced to sit down and spin wool all day.
The issue with factories is poor wages, unsafe working conditions and environmental impact, all of which can be fixed through things like regulatory bodies and unions, the issue is not the fact that goods are no longer all made at home
depiction is not the same as glorification and I need people to get thatÂ
depiction from the POV of a character who thinks itâs okay is still not glorification
[ID: Tweet by Rachel (@RachelSketching) on 22 Dec 21 that reads: âpeople end up unable to see depiction as anything other than endorsement when their entire cultural diet is escapist fun and reassurance. they see something make them uncomfortable and can only assume people are watching horrible shit as vicarious pleasure and are horrifiedâ /End description]
