somewhere in south downs...
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
Three Goblin Art

★
tumblr dot com

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
KIROKAZE
taylor price
wallacepolsom

ellievsbear
untitled
Sweet Seals For You, Always

@theartofmadeline

⁂

oozey mess
No title available

izzy's playlists!
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH
No title available
Noah Kahan
seen from United Kingdom
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 United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Spain
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Uruguay
seen from Singapore
@the-real-kiri
somewhere in south downs...
Family
One thing i love about Alexios so much is how he cares about his family. How he does everything to find, reunite and protect them. Family is what matters the most to him. And also to me.
I love this scene, when he finds his mother so much and i always cry a lot of happy tears with him. He is so nervous and yet endlessly happy. He deserves every bit of joy in his life. And meeting his mother again is one the happiest days ever.
I have thoughts about the whole feminist anti-interrupting thing. Like I agree, men do talk over people and it is disrespectful, but I also think there are cultures, specifically Jews, where talking over each other is actually a sign of being engaged in the conversation. It’s something I really struggle with in the south, because up in New York, even non-Jews participated in this cooperative conversation style, but down here, whenever I do it by accident, the whole convo stops and it gets called out and it’s a whole thing. Idk idk I feel like there’s different types of interruptive like there’s constructive interrupting where you add on to whatever is being said - helpful interrupting, and then there’s like interrupting where you just start saying something unrelated because you were done listening. I have ADHD so I’ve def done the latter too by accident, but I’m talking about being more accepting of the former.
I think a lot of the social mores leftists enforce around communication tend to be very white. Like Jews are not the only group of people that have distinct communication styles. Like the enforcement of turn-based communication, not raising your voice (not just in anger but also in humor or excitement), etc. it’s always interesting that the most pushback I get about how I communicate come from white people (mostly women actually, white men just give me patronizing looks because they don’t feel like they can call me out in same way). Like I’ve been teaching these workshops, and a few of them have been primarily black people, and I’ve noticed black people will also engage in cooperative interrupting (and I love it!). This isn’t a developed thought and I welcome feedback. Idk I think there should be space in leftist organizing for more diverse communication styles.
Here’s a source:
WASHINGTON -- The next time someone accuses you of interrupting, you might want to explain that you are not being rude: You're actually enga
As a linguist: overlapping talk is not the same thing as an interruption!
An interruption is specifically intended to stop another person from speaking so you can take over. Other reasons that talk might overlap:
close latching -- how much time should I give between when you stop talking and when I start? Very close latching can feature a lot of overlaps.
participatory listening -- how do I signal to you that I’m engaged with what you’re saying and paying attention? Do I make any noise at all, or do I limit myself to minimal “backchannel” noises (mm-hmm, ah, yeah), or do I fully verbalize my reactions as you’re going? Maybe even chime in along with you, if I anticipate what you’re about to say, to show how well we’re vibing?
support request -- this can shade into interruption as a form of sealioning, but if someone interjects a request like “I didn’t catch that” or “What’s that mean?” it’s not really an interruption, because they’re not trying to end/take my turn away, they’re inviting me to keep going with clarification/adaptation.
asides -- if there’s more than two people involved in a conversation, a certain amount of cross-talk is probably inevitable.
The norms around these kinds of overlaps vary -- by context (we all use more audible backchannel on the phone; an interview is not a sermon is not a casual chat), by culture, and yes, by gender, which is why it’s a feminist issue. But gender doesn’t exist in a vaccuum! Some reasons overlaps might be mis-interpreted as interruptions when they’re not intended to be:
norms about turn latching: someone who’s not used to close-latching conversation might feel interrupted or stepped on when talking to someone who is. The converse is that someone who’s expecting close-latching might feel the absence of it as awkward silence, withdrawal, coldness, etc.
norms about backchannel: if you’re not expecting me to provide running commentary on your story or finish your sentences (or if I’m doing it wrong) then you might feel interrupted. But if you’re expecting that level of feedback you might feel ignored.
neurodivergence: If I have auditory processing problems, I might take longer to respond to you than you’re expecting. If I have impulse control problems, I might blurt something out as soon as I think of it, but I don’t necessarily want you to stop. If I have trouble with nonverbal or paralinguistic cues, I might not latch my turns the way you expect, or my backchannel might be timed in a way you don’t expect.
Non-native speakers of a language may need more time to process speech; may speak more slowly and with pauses in different places than native speakers; may not pick up the same cues about turn-latching and backchannel, resulting in a timing difference; may need to make more requests for support.
Norms around conversation tend to be super white/Western/male/NT; even among linguists, the way we talk about analyzing talk usually presupposes discrete turns, with one person who “has the floor” and everyone else listening. It even gets coded into our technology -- I thing the account’s gone private, but someone recently tweeted, “For the sake of my wife’s family, Zoom needs to incorporate an ‘ashkenazi jewish’ checkbox” because the platform is programmed to try to identify a “main speaker” and auto-mute everyone else. Most of the progress on this front in linguistics has been pushed by Black women and Jewish women, or else we’d probably still be acting like Robert’s Rules represent the natural expression of human instincts.
And it’s very White Feminism to recognize how conversations styles have disparate impacts across gender lines without also recognizing other axes along which conversation styles vary, once that empower us as well as oppress us. Just because I feel interrupted doesn’t mean I am interrupted, and it definitely doesn’t mean I have the right to scream “EVERYBODY SHUT UP!!” until I’m the only one talking.
I don’t ... have a great way to end this? Just that it’s good to recognize competing needs in communication, and have some humility and intentionality about whose needs gets prioritized and how.
I’m a very one word person when it comes to conversation that doesn’t really engage me, but if I am engaged then I am REALLY engaged, and find in my excitement I will talk over people about the subject to either add to what they were saying or finish what they were saying bc I’m really excited about the conversation.
Unfortunately my family are really obsessed about this idea of “interrupting” and I get consistently reprimanded for it and as soon as I am I find all my engagement just slips away. As does the conversation. I just return to one worded answers. So it was nice to read that this is actually common and I’m not just being rude or wrong in interrupting when people speak, bc I don’t mean to change the convo bc I’m bored, I’m doing it bc I’m really interested in what the person is talking about and want to engage. Nothing worse than someone ignoring what you’re talking about and interrupting ofc, so I wouldn’t condone that at all, but I feel the west should normalise this idea of enagaement, bc it really shows if you’re vibing with someone or not.
She climbed on top of him while he completes the paperwork to adopt her. (via crolin88)
cc; @petermorwood
THE CLONE WARS: 1.17 | THE BLUE SHADOW VIRUS
english tourists are causing problems again
The history of Earth has never been summed up so succinctly before.
wow this reblog is funnier than my entire blog
Digital artist Daniel Voshart recreates the ‘real’ faces of Roman emperors thanks to machine learning. You can learn more about the process, discover more emperors or buy a poster here.
[Marcus Aurelius]
[Lucius Verus]
[Trajan]
NO WAY IN HELL WERE THEY THIS WHITE
Today we are going to discuss a very serious topic: individuals who think that Italic people were POC.
I went down a rabbit hole of DNA studies trying to understand why people on tumblr seem to think the Romans were not white, and here are a few thoughts:
in Europe, ‘white’ isn’t a thing
in the sense that there are so many shades of white, it doesn’t really mean anything
like, Spanish white and Swedish white are different things, but we wouldn’t consider either ‘non-white’ or ‘whiter’
you can generally tell where someone’s from, but there are people who ‘look out of place’ a bit everywhere
either because recent or century-old migrations, or because of a previous population that lived there and then the borders moved or something
and: in a nutshell, Italian geography discourages friendships
that means that before the Romans came along, people generally kept to themselves, so there’s more genetic diversity the farther back you go
at some point in the Neolithic, there were non Indo-European tribes living in Italy, but we don’t know exactly where they came from
the Indo-European people, on the other hand, probably invaded from the North
except for the Etruscans, because as it turns out, Herodotus was right (AGAIN! HAHHAHAHAHAHA SUCK IT HATERS) and they actually came from somewhere in modern Turkey
which still doesn’t mean they weren’t white, btw
even today, there’s plenty of people in the Middle East who look like this:
[top to bottom: a Kurdish fighter; Iranian politician Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf; Syrian writer Samar Yazbek]
so the notion of ‘race’ as it’s understood in the US doesn’t really work elsewhere
if it even works in the US, that is
so anyway, from what we know from literary sources, the Romans weren’t incredibly dark
(btw people abroad, and especially Americans, tend to have a fixed idea of what Italians look like and act like)
(but most of the Italians who emigrated to the US came from four Southern regions - Campania, Puglia, Basilicata, Calabria, and Sicilia - and because Italy basically became a united country, like, 20 years ago, it’s still a very diverse nation)
(so what you think of as a ‘typical’ Italian is probably the great-grandnephew of a ‘typical’ resident of one small village in Sicily)
and the ‘typical’ Roman you often see in movies, with tanned skin, dark eyes and curly black hair, probably wasn’t a ‘typical’ Roman at all
those traits are way more common in some areas of the South - where about 37% of the population has Greek DNA because ancient colonies
so while blond hair probably wasn’t really common (we can tell because it was greatly admired and sought after, and people generally like what they don’t have), neither were darker skin and black hair
in fact, a lot of politicians and other VIPs are described in the texts as having light eyes (light blue, green and gray) and some had blond or red hair
others died their hair blond with pigeon poop, but that’s another story
so the bottom line is - like modern inhabitants of Italy, ancient Romans were white, but in many cases you could probably tell from where their family came from, and some were ‘whiter’ than others depending on their ancestry
that said, the European past was a lot more diverse than our instinctive perception of it
there was a lot of trade going on, slaves from conquered lands, wealthy and poor people roaming about, and units of foreign-born Roman soldiers in unlikely places, so that’s something to keep in mind.
As a bonus for reading this far, here is a smiling wolf.
(Also please stop saying those guys are chads, daddys and DILFs. Most of them were dangerous sociopaths who’d feed you to their pet eels if they could.)
@ink-phoenix uh. Have at it?
OP forgot to add these:
Pertinax
Caracalla: (UL) Vatican Museum; (UR) Met, NYC; (LL) The Severan Tondo; (LR) Naples National Archaeological Museum
Philip the Arab: (L) Vatican Museum
244–249 (died aged 45 — Killed in the Battle of Verona by Decius
Quintillus [Marcus Aurelius Claudius Quintillus]
Florianus
Carinus
Numerian
To add to the commentary above, many of the greatest men in Roman history came from provinces outside of the Italian Peninsula, but they were and have since been considered Roman (examples: the emperor Trajan was from Hispania, and Septimus Severus was born in an African province).
Later in Roman history, under Caracalla (who was born in Gaul and of mixed Berber and Syrian descent, so another Roman figure not Italian-Roman) in 212 AD all free men in the entire Roman Empire was granted citizenship. That meant that any Germanics, Africans, Latins, Hispanics, Syrian, etc. were all considered Roman! Regardless of race.
This is what encompassed the Roman Empire:
So you can imagine the intermixing that went on at the time and how the concept or “white” the way America presents it is absolutely inconsequential for the time period we’re talking about.
After the fall of the Roman Empire, Commune cities formed, autonomous republic that survived exclusively on Marine trade with Spain, Africa, and East India. Amalfi, Gaeta and Venice in the 11th century were already autonomous maritime republics. Around 1100, Genoa, Pisa and Ancona emerged as independent maritime republics too.
Trade, shipbuilding and banking helped support their powerful navies in the Mediterranean in those medieval centuries. Immigration and ethnic inter-mixing was pretty common — to the point that Italians to this day look as varied and different from north to south and from city to city as it behooves the multicultural and trade-rich peninsula it always was.
THIS. The US is so obsessed with this notion of white or not regarding Europe when really, we’re far more diverse than that. White is not just white in Europe and you guys over the pond seriously need to realise that. Like I’m as white as you get, yet my brother is really dark? I’m European, Italians are European - it’s too vague a notion and it kinda annoys me...
My Revan may be a Sith, but he still prefers his dearest utility droid (which he stole) over that horrible horrible HK-47 that insists on calling him a meatbag...
I don’t normally do these challenges but saw @kmerolzzzz ‘s beauty and was all: yeah I gotta draw Ashoka. Had a lot of fun with this! Congrats on the 5K!
Been drawing with thunderstorms all afternoon which was a really nice mood, only issue is, I’ve had to dip into my 4G to upload this. No internet all afternoon definitely is not a mood. Help me!
Remember when Jeff Bezos, who is worth 181 billion USD donated 690k to stopping Australian fires? Yeah, me too.
anakin skywalker does not use jedi mind tricks
not once in the films
do you think that’s a coincidence
not on your life buddy
anakin skywalker does not have it in him to overrule another being’s free will
he murders a bunch of children with a laser sword
Anakin & Obi-Wan in Season 7:
“Your state of helplessness really sold them on my surrender talk.”
I’ve seen Horny Internet Fangirls fall physically in lust with everything from standard hunks to weird cartoons to robots to monsters and every body type from potbelly bear to skeletal beanpole and it never fails to amaze me, when by comparison, straight guys seem to have trouble with any woman who isn’t hourglass shaped
at first I thought this post was going to bash horny internet fangirls, but it turned out great.
“say what you want about the prequels-” ok i will. i love them
i’ve been seeing a lot of posts on my dash about the witcher and it looked pretty interesting to me, but when i went on netflix the description was really vague and unhelpful. in attempt to not accidentally spoil myself by looking on the web, would you mind telling me a little about it?
first of all, to watch the witcher you need to replace your expectation of “good” with “totally unhinged.”
the show is about henry cavill in extremely tight clothing, carrying around a broadsword, facing moral dilemmas, fighting monsters, and having sex. he takes a potion before every fight (which isn’t explained) and no one in the story ages (which also isn’t explained) so people’s parents and grandparents look the same age as their progeny.
the witcher is not a monster of the week show, nor does it have a coherent ongoing arc. it is not told in chronological order. most of the things that happen are unrelated to everything else that happens. the timeline might happen over weeks, decades, or centuries, and none of that is explained. lore is told in fits and bursts and makes no sense at all. the first episode is absolutely useless and you should not judge the rest of the season based on it, but it has a great sword fight and geralt (that’s henry cavill in extremely tight clothing) talks lovingly to his horse. that’s it. that’s the show.
what is important to know is that the season is adapted from short stories set before the events of the book series. so it’s not season 1 as much as season 0, which is why it feels like nothing is connected or makes sense. it’s a primer to what i’m assuming the next season will be (and i think/hope the fandom will really take off).
everyone seems to have boners for everyone else. most of the characters are women and they are all absolutely feral. the showrunner is a woman, and most of the eps are written and directed by women. it’s like watching a really wild fanfic come to life. what i love about it is that it’s just so fucking weird. every expectation i had going into it was shattered, and even the moments that were cheesy or boring or cringey or dumb i found somewhat endearing. now that i’m done watching it, i kind of want to watch it again, which is something i rarely do. after every episode i thought, “i really don’t like this, and i don’t want to watch anymore.” and after every episode, i clicked play on the next.
if you like hot beefy men who are deeply misunderstood as being the bad guy but are actually good-aligned, you’ll like the witcher. if you like complicated, all-powerful, borderline-evil female characters who are greedy and heartless and have ample room for growth, you’ll like the witcher. if you like isolated men who are chased by endearing comedic relief sidekicks, you’ll like the witcher. if you like stories in which seemingly self-centered men are made to become paternal toward helpless beings, you will like the witcher. if you want to ship everyone with everyone else and be totally overwhelmed by attractive people doing attractive things, you will like the witcher. if you like catchy bops that will be stuck in your head for 87 years, you’ll like the witcher.
the only way you will not like the witcher is if you’re expecting it to be good.
this is the best summary of the witcher i have seen
As the screenshot my friend sent me says:
can someone explain what “toss a coin to your witcher” means? im assuming a witcher is not just the titular character but is a category of person? how does one possess one? why do they need coins? why are we tossing them; is a witcher like a public fountain?
A witcher is, indeed, a category of person. They’re, like, alchemically-enhanced monster-hunting mutants, or something like that (I haven’t read the books).
One doesn’t possess one, but one can employ one, if one has any monsters that need hunting.
They need coins to exchange for goods and services, just like everyone else.
We are tossing them because that sounds jauntier than just giving them.
hope this helps
I laughed so fucking hard at this entire post, it’s perfect.
The Witcher is entirely unhinged and I fucking loved it.
Also if the feral women and beefy men haven’t convinced you, try the adorable bisexual bard:
I loved this show about 4000% more than I was expecting to. The moment at the end of episode one where I realized What Was Going On was great. It very, very much expects viewers to pay attention, and it’s not going to straight up answer your questions. It would much rather you figure it out.
While the above posts are all incredibly correct, the thing that got ME into the show was that it’s the story of a man who refused to make a choice, and he’s been paying for his wilfull inaction ever since. And I love it.
Also, he is the least interesting person and he KNOWS it. That helps a great deal.
can confirm that The Witcher is excellent
I’ll just remain to be that salty game fan and say: it was okaaaaay and I have no intention of rewatching it at all.
The games do the stories far more justice, which is ironic since they’re not based on the books at all.
Problem is I wanted it to be good, considering how dark and good the games are.
#the team: a summary