[twiceroyaldove]

agree or disagree: string cheese should be stringy

Agree, it should be stringy

Disagree, it should be non-stringy

Both is good

Both is bad

I'm bald

Remaining time: 6 days 20 hours

Example of stringy string cheese, with small strings visible where the cheese has been pulled apart

Example of non-stringy string cheese, pulled apart into defined chunks

[wellen-katze]

*Boogie Street* Shakes - Disco Elysium comic

[sturionic]

"Learn the fundamentals first" seems like really sound universal advice, and as a former classical musician, I can vouch for it. You will have a more solid foundation for increasing complexity if you put in the time to study in a structured way. If you don't, you'll have a lot of shit to fix later.

As a former music teacher, I can also say that "learn the fundamentals first" is the death knell for a vast percentage of beginners, especially adult learners.

I've run into this with drawing several times, where some well-meaning artist has lectured me on needing to study anatomy properly or not use shortcuts like CSP brushes. And oh, believe me, I know. I know exactly how to learn an artistic discipline in a structured way. I just...don't want to!

The thing is, I'm not aiming to be a professional artist. I want to draw my gay little anime guys. I would undoubtedly improve at art much faster if I approached every gay little anime guy drawing as a study exercise. But I would also have quit drawing a decade ago if I couldn't just let myself enjoy drawing imperfect fucked-up little guys with whatever shortcuts I needed to body myself across the finish line.

With my adult piano students, my approach was always "What's your goal?" If their goal was to learn exactly one Elton John songbook to play at parties, then...that's what we did. We'd put tape on the keys to label the notes, and just fuckin go for it. Learning exactly one Elton John songbook is a good and noble musical goal, full stop.

Some of my students needed and enjoyed a more structured approach to learning; if they wanted to be able to play classical music, then yes, scales were going to have to enter the equation at some point. And yet others would learn the Elton John songbook, catch their white whale, and realize they wanted to explore more of the ocean. The scales were still there for them to learn!

Often the choice isn't between "learn art well" and "learn art imperfectly" - the choice is between "learn art imperfectly" and "don't do art at all." To which I say, learn imperfectly! Or, what the hell, don't 'learn' art. Just do, and enjoy the doing of it.

You have official permission from your local pretentious classical music snob: fuck the fundamentals. You can always unfuck them later (but only if you want to).

[pmamtraveller]

The Wait by Darian Mederos

[beansoup3000]

You know what's so devastating to me about "God that I were a man"? It's the way that in this situation, Beatrice is not exceptional. In the first acts, she appears to be exempt from the gender roles that everyone around her complies with: she has avoided marriage so far, and she has license to playfully criticize and reject being "over-master'd with a piece of valiant dust" (2.2.55-56). She even suggests to Hero that she claim some agency over her engagement: "it is my cousin's duty to make curtsy, and say, 'father, as it please you.' But yet for all that, cousin, let him be a handsome fellow, or else make another curtsy and say, 'father, as it please me'" (2.1.48-51). Beatrice has carved out an existence for herself that everyone else tolerates; her wit allows her to live outside of people's expectations of womanhood.

But Beatrice is not exempt from being a woman. When it actually matters, when Hero is disgraced by powerful men with no regard for her wellbeing or humanity, Beatrice can't do anything about it. And "God that I were a man" is so painful because it reminds us--and Benedick--that no matter how transcendent Beatrice appears to be, she is still constrained by her role in Messina's society. Back in act one and act two, the reason that she was allowed to poke fun at men wasn't that she couldn't be stopped; it was that it didn't matter. She has no actual power to change the order of things, and so her verbal sparring is not a threat.

(An aside: I think that Benedick is taken aback by "God that I were a man" because this has never really occurred to him. He sees Beatrice as his intellectual equal, and he has watched her carve out space for herself effectively (they know each other of old). In the 2011 production with David Tennant, the costuming and acting choices show how Benedick starts actively performing masculinity only when he accepts Beatrice's request to kill Claudio--when he has to "be a man for [Beatrice's] sake" (4.1.314). In the first acts, he wears tight clothes, a crop top, and a miniskirt. From the wedding on, he wears his military uniform and then a suit. His body language also changes; he abandons physical comedy, stands tall, and emotes less when he speaks to Claudio and Don Pedro. He wields his masculinity as a weapon because he now realizes it's a weapon that Beatrice cannot wield herself.)

The crashing realization of Beatrice's limits is so devastating to me because it's so familiar. I can only speak from experiences I've had, but as a queer woman I know that tolerance is different than empowerment. That having grown up evading dating and romance with made-up excuses to hide my queerness, having realized the extent of the misogyny in an organization I cared about and having grappled with how that misogyny prevented me from effecting change, being allowed to exist is not the same as being able to participate, to make things different. God, that I were a man. I would eat his heart in the marketplace.

[daloy-politsey]

What I Learned Watching a Co-Worker Get Forced Out

Corporate Glossary: every Friday, learn the secret meaning of common corporate words

“They’re trying to discharge her constructively. Do you know what Constructive Discharge means?” She asked.

As soon as I heard the term ‘Constructive Discharge,’ I knew I’d never seen it on a vocabulary quiz.

“No. What does it mean?” I asked.

She explained.

“Constructive discharge is a fancy way of saying “being forced out.” It’s not good. And if you’re not a lawyer or in human resources, you’ll probably learn what it means when it’s happening to you.”

“Oh my God. I’ve seen this my entire career and never knew it even had a name.” I thought.

You’ve seen constructive Discharge too. You may have experienced it. We’ve all made choices to avoid it.

Constructive discharge defined

“We can’t fire you, but we’ll make you so miserable you’ll quit, and then we won’t have to pay your unemployment.”

Then there’s the textbook definition:

“A constructive discharge occurs when your employer has made working conditions unbearable, forcing you to resign.”

Or as one person put it.

“I didn’t get handed a pink slip, but when you’re not wanted, people have a way of letting you know.”

HR isn’t always the secret police.

Employees aren’t always victims of evil-doers.

However, employers push employees out all the time to maintain and protect the, “We didn’t do anything wrong, YOU did,” power structure.

Constructive Discharge looks like this:

— Meeting invitations slow to a trickle, and you’re excluded from emails and generally looped out of what’s going on.

— People stop talking to you or stop talking when you walk in.

— Your emails don’t get answers, or they arrive too late to be of value.

— Suddenly, your work is not good enough, though nothing about your work has changed.

— Reviews, once good or even glowing, are now mediocre or bad.

— Instead of a bonus, you get a Performance Improvement Plan.

— Warnings and write-ups start so they can justify your eventual termination with documentation of your “poor performance”

— Your work, clients, assignments go away, or they overwhelm you with work.

— The words “Set up to fail” were practically invented to describe this scenario.

Constructive Discharge is illegal

It isn’t easy to prove you’re a target, and it’s even more challenging if you don’t even know constructive discharge is a real thing.

If you’ve ever experienced this and don’t fully understand what’s happening to you beyond knowing you’re in the process of being excommunicated, it can be hell. It’s not uncommon for the experience to leave long-lasting scars.

Talk to anyone who’s ever been through it. They’ll tell you.

Knowing constructive discharge exists and how it’s used gives you power to predict what’s coming and to protect yourself.

Seeing the endgame helps you in two ways.

You know what to expect. Having a sense of what’s coming next is enormously empowering. You can go on the offensive and protect yourself. Constructive discharge works to crush your ego, making you feel you did something wrong and deserve this treatment.

Without strategy, you end up being a miserable pawn in your employer’s endgame.

Remember, they’re almost certainly building a case to fire you in the event the hellscape they create for you doesn’t persuade you to quit.

If you’re getting pushed out, and you know what to look for you can prove constructive discharge and you can get unemployment benefits, be released from payback obligations on a signing bonus, and protect your mental health.

You’re not crazy, incompetent, or a failure. This is real and it’s carefully executed to leave you holding the bag and feeling like you did something wrong.

If they force you out, in addition to feeling horrible, you lose your paycheck, benefits health insurance, and possibly owe them money.

[twiceroyaldove]

"Constructive discharge is illegal" is a very misleading statement. (At least on the US federal level, and this appears to be US-based from the preview) Constructive discharge is only illegal if normal firing would also be illegal in that situation -- discrimination on the basis of a protected class, retaliation for protected collective action, etc.

It can still be very relevant for things like unemployment benefits and contract terms like OOP mentions! But "may be considered equivalent to a firing in some legal contexts" doesn't automatically mean "illegal." Probably check with a lawyer in your jurisdiction before you act on any assumptions.

[constance-mcentee-deactivated20]

Without naming your job, tell me something you say over and over again at work.

"I can note your interest in that feature for future development."

[partywithponies]

Nothing more frustrating than talking about history with people on the internet who don't understand how averages work.

You'll be like "it's so tragic that this happened to this historical figure, she was so young", and some dipshit will be like "um actually the average life expectancy was only like 35 in those days so she really wasn't that young for the time at all 😌", and you have to explain that that "average life expectancy" is heavily skewed by the incredibly high infant and child mortality rate of the time, and that people who lived to adulthood and lived normal lives did in fact usually live to their 60s or older. Elderly people did in fact exist in the old days.

[historical-fashion-polls]

which outfit would you rather wear? (1932)

left 💙

right 💛

Voting ended on12h

[twiceroyaldove]

god and now im thinking about the sparrow. same sort of would-be Shocking Twist that's literally just the thing you were assuming all along

[twiceroyaldove]

baffling writing choices being made in the new little house on the prairie series

the year is 1870. your new bf tells you explicitly he has been married and that marriage "ended" due to wanting different lifestyles. you say that's cool we're all starting new lives out here :) you keep seeing him for several months. you ask him about marriage and he says uhh but im STILL married. you are.....shocked and appalled?? to hear that he's not....what exactly? girl what???did you think????he meant???? No-Fault Divorce Will Not Be Legalized For Another One Hundred Years.

[twiceroyaldove]

on top of the sheer laziness of writing a cliched He's Not Divorced?! storyline in a setting where it's fully incoherent,

they could've just Not had him disclose the marriage at the start. let this be the first she's hearing about it. like have an ounce of courage in your writing ffs! i know it's a kid-friendly show but the main characters get to make bad decisions (albeit with a heaping side of therapy-speak), you can let a side character do it too

[twiceroyaldove]

baffling writing choices being made in the new little house on the prairie series

the year is 1870. your new bf tells you explicitly he has been married and that marriage "ended" due to wanting different lifestyles. you say that's cool we're all starting new lives out here :) you keep seeing him for several months. you ask him about marriage and he says uhh but im STILL technically married. you are.....shocked and appalled?? to hear that he's not....what exactly? girl what???did you think????he meant???? No-Fault Divorce Will Not Be Legalized For Another One Hundred Years.

[lambandlion]

When Bella finds out she’s pregnant in BD, she mentions that her last period was 16 days before the wedding (the wedding took place on August 13th 2006) and that at the time of her phonecall with Carlisle (which was 17 days after the wedding) she was 5 days late. She also mentions that her period is never late.

This means that her cycle is 28 days exactly (16+17-5) and that her last period began on July 28th 2006. That was also her last period EVER btw because then she got pregnant and then was immediately changed.

So I counted backwards to every single one of Bella’s periods, from her last one before she changed, to the first one after she moved to Forks. The results:

To elaborate, Bella was on her period:

When she first met Edward at biology class (January 18th 2005)

At the meadow (March 12th) and baseball game (March 13th)

The first time she heard Edward’s voice in NM (January 16th 2006)

When she bought the bikes and she started repairing them with Jake (January 17-18th)

When she and Jacob did homework together and she invited him to the movies (February 14th)

The day she realized Jacob is a werewolf (March 11th)

Quite possibly when she jumped off the cliff, depending on how long it lasts for her (March 16th)

When  Jacob confronted Edward and Bella about the treaty and gave Bella back her motorcycle (April 7th)

When Edward caught Riley’s scent at Bella’s house (June 2nd)

At the Quileute bonfire (June 3rd)

When Jacob went missing in BD (Late June/Early July)

So… yeah that’s what I did today.

[twiceroyaldove]

for a long time, i wasn't on any texting lists. bc i didnt sign up for them, and if i ever signed up for one by mistake, i could unsubscribe and that would actually work.

now i am somehow on one william texting lists for every blue politician in the country and all unsubscribing apparently does is take me off the list for texts from that singular phone number but not any other phone numbers text-banking for the same campaign. hell world!!!

[batmanisagatewaydrug]

I often take time away from tumblr, and every single time I come back, an ask of yours crosses my dash referencing some new disk horse. It's never the original either. It's always someone attacking you for your take or trying to start related drama. It really is like seeing a shadow pass under my ship. Except when I look down, Ben Affleck is swimming through the water with a cigarette and a harpoon gun

Anyways, thank you for your service o7

can anyone out there do art and whip up Ben Affleck prowling the sea with his cigarette and a harpoon gun for the love of god

[3hobbitsinatrenchcoat]

I'm not a traditional artist BUT I spent most of the 2000s doing photobashes and manips. I could see this poor drowned man in my minds eye

[batmanisagatewaydrug]

that's what I'm talking about!!!!

[fanfavoritefragrances]

can I play too?

[batmanisagatewaydrug]

Affelia...

[inthetags]

Reblog and put in the tags the book that is physically nearest to you at this moment.

[victusinveritas]

[jackhawksmoor]

[weaselle]

"adventurers are actually more scared of you than you are of them"

"he's literally just doing what an adventurer is supposed to do"

"do you think they think of us as Giant Adventurers?"

"do you know how many other creatures would be infesting our cave if there were no adventurers?"

"how would you like it if you were bumbling along on your little adventurer day, and some giant dragon thing squished you for the crime of being yourself?"

"y'know, so many dragons are grossed out by them, but i think they're fascinating! Did you know some adventurers form symbiotic relationships with small monsters? Some of them even do a simplified form of spellcraft! Like, with actual magic and everything!"

[mercaius]

"Of course they are swarming your cave, you dolt! You captured a juvenile queen and took it home with you, what did you expect!?"