❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
Keni
JVL
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
Three Goblin Art
Product Placement
art blog(derogatory)
noise dept.
styofa doing anything
trying on a metaphor
@theartofmadeline
todays bird
tannertan36
祝日 / Permanent Vacation
Cosmic Funnies
Kiana Khansmith
Misplaced Lens Cap
Show & Tell
★
Stranger Things
seen from Germany
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from Canada
seen from United States
seen from Italy
seen from Singapore
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from Türkiye
seen from Chile
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
@unterwaesche
I keep getting followers who are undoubtedly going to have a bad time here, so just a heads up I'm a Christian anarchist who loves capitalism and thinks guns are neato, and if you see me arguing outside of what you might assume my values would be it's either because I can't help myself sometimes when someone is mischaracterizing a concept whether I even agree with the concept or not, or you don't understand my values.
This is how we played Mario Party before video games
explaining gamergate to future generations: so video games were looked down on for being toys meant for little boys to play with and they didn't like that, so they spent a lot of time and effort crafting elaborate arguments on forums far and wide that video games were serious art and deserved serious analysis, but then they were very unhappy when a woman did exactly that, so in order to prove they weren't a bunch of racist misogynists, they went on a years long harassment campaign against a bunch of women which both ruined the fun of criticizing the star wars sequels *and* eventually helped the United States get rid of federal abortion rights, but at the end of the day it was worth it because all of our video game news is written by ai instead of women with dyed hair
I've I said before, but I guess it bears repeating: Just because video games are art(they are), it in no way follows that we must accept, endorse, or agree with whatever some self-proclaimed 'critic' says about them.
Especially when said critic has all but admitted that she doesnt actually play games and just went into the medium looking for things to criticize
I like this simple video explanation
submitted by someone that wants to remain anonymous
"Like, that response to the Doe-eyed Disaster post is correct - The video game 'analysis' of the era would wildly and often intentionally mischaracterize games and were absolutely not real and valid analysis But like. I think the larger thing is that post is a complete, 100% mischaracterization of events and the causes of gamergate Lets not forget the cultural critics in the vein of Sarkeesian were controversial long before Gamergate emerged, and mostly unrelated to the actual controversies which Gamergate was about - The movement even tried to distance themselves from these figures whenever possible. Rather, it was spurred by potentially unlisted personal relationships involving games covered by these sites, the censorship of discussions on specific controversies, and behind-the-scenes collusions by seemingly unrelated games media sites with the purpose of pushing specific narratives. It was never a movement against the analysis of games, nor even a criticism of when that analysis was incorrect. That was a totally different controversy at best tangentially related to the discussion
(Also uhh... If you respond to this publicly, may I request my name be off it? I kinda don't want to kick a hornet's nest, here)"
Hey OP, why are y'all still lying and trying to rework a dead narrative to make yourselves victims a full ten years later? I get that it was probably embarrassing to be on the wrong side of a consumer revolt because women were in on the con, but move on already.
Democracy is a joke because the vast majority of voters have zero notion of how the government works (or doesn't work) and are therefore completely unqualified to choose who rules them
I unironically, honestly don't believe in it, and I think the reasons it exists today have nothing to do with how "good" it is for us, the proles. Because what else in Government (or the megacorps with which they share power) exists for the good of us?
Believing this one aspect of government (and this alone) exists for our benefit or gives us some meaningful bit of power is...not something anyone over the age of 30 should believe. The tired old joke is right: If voting accomplished anything, it'd be illegal.
The older I get, the less and less I can separate anything I do from my faith. It isn’t just my religion; it shapes my entire view of the world and separates me from many people who view the world a lot differently than I do.
God the 11 year old girls you put on this earth to climb trees and play with plastic animals are buying foundation at the drug store
for a second i thought you meant foundation like, a building foundation. not makeup
God the 11 year old girls you put on this earth are building something great and terrible on the edge of town
reddit is entering like an inverted renaissance of bad posting. this is one of the best/worst posts ive seen in a long time
I'm truly amazed of how often eugenicists can say "eugenics isn't bad just because some eugenicists did bad things" when the exact bad thing in question was eugenics.
I also love how his example of an 'undesirable ' trait is something completely benign
HIT IT🧚🏼♂️
There’s really only one way to go with that song, go hard or stay home.
alright everyone is being sassy but nobody has brought up the actual reason why scientists are interested in the titanic in the notes
Per wikipedia:
The Titanic was made of steel, presumably to resist corrosion (i mean. thats why boats are made of steel i assume) but even when iron/steel rusts people did not expect to find like. decomposition. bacteria are EATING the titanic.
and there's wood furniture from the titanic that isn't decaying. hell, there are wood ships at the bottom of the ocean that archaeologists study. so the expectation people have for the titanic is not that the steel would decompose at the bottom of the ocean. Even in 100 years, since there are much more ancient preserved wooden ships iirc.
(im not particularly knowledgeable about ships, i just had heard about the science going on around the titanic so i wanted to clarify that on this post for people)
The Titanic is an exceptionally weird whalefall basically.
Not a marine biologist but biologist enough to weigh in on this. The reason we have iron eating bacteria but not wood eating bacteria at the bottom of the ocean is simple. Hydrothermal vents release a cocktail of different mineral ores into the ocean. And bacteria and other organisms evolved alongside those so they evolved to digest these, like iron or other metal ores
Wood however does not exist at the bottom of the ocean since it basically never sinks down, even when logs are flushed out into the ocean they basically never end up at the ocean floor. So there's no bacteria that evolved to decompose lignin, which is already complex enough to decompose on the surface. And that's why wooden ships or the furniture on the Titanic stay intact for hundreds of years or longer.
Okay, but I remember reading a magazine stating that the titanic would basically be gone by now because of the rust eating the ship.
The sister ship HMHS Britannic is still perfectly preserved because of the way it sank, and partly in due to the coral that has grown around it keeping the structure in tact I believe was the reason.
Coral acting like a living fossil specifically for sunken ships is the coolest thing I've ever heard
So lemme get this straight, the Titanic is a whalefall, the Britannic is a biological mummy, and all the wood ships that sink into the deep ocean are preserved incorrupt because nothing can eat them.
Zombie, mummy, lich, respectively.
I just want to add that wood may not end up in the deep sea constantly enough to have caught the interest of bacteria, but the deep ocean has an echinoderm we call a "sea daisy" that only eats wood.
Known for his unmatched intellect, Kim's statement has caught attention across social media, as many are surprised to see such a bold profession of faith from someone in the world of science and logic.
as the world's lowest IQ record holder, I also believe that Jesus Christ is God, the way and the truth and the life
You know what I’m not a fan of?
Parenting advice that assumes the child does not intentionally misbehave. That it’s all curiosity, or they don’t know what they’re doing.
If you’ve ever worked with kids, you know that’s not true. I’m not saying they know one hundred percent of the time that what they’re doing is wrong, or that misbehavior can’t be a result of curiosity. I am saying that they’re a lot more aware of what they’re doing than it seems some people give them credit for.
It can’t even all be blamed on the parents. You can have good parents with kids who still intentionally misbehave.
oh, and the line “babies can’t manipulate their parents.” There is an age range of babyhood where, no, a baby isn’t trying to manipulate their parents. However, I have seen my youngest nephew at six months deciding that when mom ate, he HAD to eat, and if she slept, he NEEDED her attention, despite being fine only seconds before. And I know it was intentional, because he knew he had his mom wrapped around his finger and one word from his dad would quiet him and he would sulk. (Both his parents, by the way, have studied child development. I promise you their parenting style is not one of ignorance.)
Just because kids don’t have the mind of adults and don’t know everything adults know, that doesn’t mean they aren’t capable or immune to intentional misbehaving or manipulation. Parent advice, especially on this site, has to be taken with a grain of salt. Kids are their own persons with their own thought processes and personalities. There isn’t a one size fits all solution to parent/raise them (not even in the same family!) and honestly, sometimes some of the nicest looking ways of parenting is rather ineffective.
As a disclaimer, I’m not saying kids are little devils who are just seeking to be bad. But I guess I feel like sometimes I come across parenting advice on here that doesn’t seem to understand the plight of parenthood and makes kids out to be all one way.
A random assortment of archaic/disused English words that should still be used:
brust (bristled or bristly)
coolth (coolness. We still have 'warmth' so why did this one disappear????)
ambiloquent (using ambiguous language)
downsteepy (steeply descending)
mazeful (confusing)
evulgate (to send out among the people, to publish or distribute)
toploftical (haughty)
hazardry (risk-taking)
dizzard (a fool, jester, or stupid person)
againster (someone who is habitually opposed to things or 'against' things)
loselry (behavior characteristic of a losel, which is similar to a 'loser,' except the connotation encompasses "profligate" or "scoundrel")
plaguey
malengine (evil intent, fraud, deceit)
beasten (of or pertaining to beasts)
wranglesome (contentious and prone to quarreling)
dwine (to waste away)
So at first I wondered if "cool" and "warm" were reflexive back when (me warmeth/cooleth) and that's where "warmth" ultimately came from but now I'm way more interested in the special declension that happens with the frequentative suffix. For a final-e verb like "dwine" or "wade" it adds a D for "dwindle" and "waddle," but with "sidle" (ostensibly converted from the noun "side") it keeps the diphthong. But then with "hurl" it drops the L in favor of a T for "hurtle." So it seems like the -le suffix requires either a plosive or fricative to come before it (or any approximate that isn't an L), and the vowel pronunciation will depend on if it converts from a noun or a verb. Neat.
Coconut 🥥 🌴 is delicious, Snoopy!
I love the flavor but I'm weak and have a hard time with the texture 😭
“I grew up in China. At the time, adults had nothing else to read other than books written by Mao Zedong. A collection of Mao’s books was a typical wedding gift for the newlyweds. Naturally, there weren’t many choices for children’s books either. The few children’s books I read had no adorable characters, nor did any convey a sense of humor or wit. There wasn’t much color in the books either. Most of the drawings were black and white, just like our colorless, dull life under socialism. One story I still remember was “The Rooster Crows at Midnight.” It was about an evil landowner, Zhou, who was very cruel to laborers who worked for him. The story said the Chinese Communist Party liberated laborers and distributed land and livestock formerly owned by Zhou to these poor laborers. One night, children patrolling the village caught Zhou as he was trying to steal a chicken. I still remember the picture in the book that depicts the scene when Zhou got caught: he knelt on the floor, head dropped, back bent, and hands tied back; the children who surrounded him all pointed their shining spears at him, with an indignant look on their faces. The author of the book disclosed in an interview later that this book was based on a true story. In real life, Zhou confessed his crime in a struggle session and was beaten to death. That’s the story I remember from my childhood. I had many nightmares after reading it. The Chinese Communist Party even turned this story into a movie. The CCP wanted people to believe owning private property and having more wealth than other people is evil. This propaganda campaign was effective. Zhou, the demonized landowner, soon became synonymous with evil. In a totalitarian regime, children’s books aren’t meant to bring any joy or inspire a healthy imagination. Instead, their sole purpose is to instill the correct political ideology in young minds so we would be prepared to become devoted soldiers of Communism. Like everyone else, I despised Zhou, the evil landowner, until years later I learned that my great-grandfather had been a landowner also. My great-grandfather was always kind, generous, and hardworking. He earned his land inch by inch through sweat, tears, and even blood. The CCP took all his land and livestock away in the name of “land reform.” He had to endure many cruel struggle sessions, but miraculously, he survived. Learning the truth about my great-grandfather made me feel that the CCP had cheated me out of my childhood twice. Not only did I not have a normal childhood, but also I fell for the CCP’s lie that landowners like my great-grandfather were terrible people.”
— Helen Raleigh, Stopping The Next Cultural Revolution Starts With Your Home Library (via gettothestabbing)
