Be eclectic in your eccentricity

I guess

[whitepeopletwitter]

[theculturedmarxist]

>First, we’ve discovered that about a quarter of all the internet connection in or out of the house were ad related. In a few hours, that’s about 10,000 out of 40,000 processed.

>We also discovered that every link on Twitter was blocked. This was solved by whitelisting the https://t.co domain.

>Once out browsing the Web, everything is loading pretty much instantly. It turns out most of that Page Loading malarkey we’ve been accustomed to is related to sites running auctions to sell Ad space to show you before the page loads. All gone now.

>We then found that the Samsung TV (which I really like) is very fond of yapping all about itself to Samsung HQ. All stopped now. No sign of any breakages in its function, so I’m happy enough with that.

>The primary source of distress came from the habitual Lemmings player in the house, who found they could no longer watch ads to build up their in-app gold. A workaround is being considered for this.

>The next ambition is to advance the Ad blocking so that it seamlessly removed YouTube Ads. This is the subject of ongoing research, and tinkering continues. All in all, a very successful experiment.

>Certainly this exceeds my equivalent childhood project of disassembling and assembling our rotary dial telephone. A project whose only utility was finding out how to make the phone ring when nobody was calling.

>Update: All4 on the telly appears not to have any ads any more. Goodbye Arnold Clarke!

>Lemmings problem now solved.

>Can confirm, after small tests, that RTÉ Player ads are now gone and the player on the phone is now just delivering swift, ad free streams at first click.

>Some queries along the lines of “Are you not stealing the internet?” Firstly, this is my network, so I may set it up as I please (or, you know, my son can do it and I can give him a stupid thumbs up in response). But there is a wider question, based on the ads=internet model.

>I’m afraid I passed the You Wouldn’t Download A Car point back when I first installed ad-blocking plug-ins on a browser. But consider my chatty TV. Individual consumer choice is not the method of addressing pervasive commercial surveillance.

>Should I feel morally obliged not to mute the TV when the ads come on? No, this is a standing tension- a clash of interests. But I think my interest in my family not being under intrusive or covert surveillance at home is superior to the ad company’s wish to profile them.

>Aside: 24 hours of Pi Hole stats suggests that Samsung TVs are very chatty. 14,170 chats a day.

>YouTube blocking seems difficult, as the ads usually come from the same domain as the videos. Haven’t tried it, but all of the content can also be delivered from a no-cookies version of the YouTube domain, which doesn’t have the ads. I have asked my son to poke at that idea.

[monitor-offist-deactivated20250]

fastest reblog in the west

[dduane]

Yeppers. :)

[the-original-sineater]

reblogging for study later AND to spread the info.

[prettiestboytoy2]

[lmaonade]

society is jumping the gun big time why the fuck are we developing AI and robots and shit brother we don't even have printers or vacuums that aren't dogshit CAN we dial it back

[drchucktingle]

it is funny because i have heard buds say things like ‘i love chuck he wrote whole harriet porber series out of spite’. bud i have never written ANYTHING out of spite. harriet porber was written out of love for my trans buds.

TRANS BUCKAROOS PROVE LOVE IS REAL. you are a brilliant shining star and you sizzle with trans wizard magic

[headspace-hotel]

Learning about edible plants (and eating them) has given me a lot of insight into the problems with the USAmerican food system

It's incredible how a supermarket gives you the sense of being surrounded by immense variety, but it's just the visual noise of advertising. In reality almost everything around you is just corn, wheat, soy, and milk, repackaged and recombined and concealed and re-flavored using additives, over and over and over again.

[inkskinned]

fucking hate it when the stuff everybody says "actually works" does actually work.

hate exercising and realizing i've let go of a lot of anxiety and anger because i've overturned my fight-or-flight response.

hate eating right and eating enough and eating 3 times a day and realizing i'm less anxious and i have more energy

hate journaling in my stupid notebook with my stupid bic ballpoint and realizing that i've actually started healing about something once i'm able to externalize it

hate forgiving myself hate complimenting myself more often hate treating myself with kindness hate taking a gratitude inventory hate having patience hate talking to myself gently

hate turning my little face up to the sun and taking deep breaths and looking at nature and grounding myself and realizing that i feel less burdened and more hopeful, more actually-here, that i am able to see the good sides of myself more clearly, that i am able to see not only how far i have to grow - but also how much growth i have already done & how much of my life i truly fill with light and laughter and love

horrible horrible horrible. hate it but i'm gonna do it tho

[maculategiraffe]

[lasenbyphoenix]

[headspace-hotel]

I think a lot about why these coping mechanisms inspire such hatred and resentment when they work, and I think it's because fear and anger are emotions that make demands and advocate for you, and defusing or deflecting them can feel like silencing yourself and molding your needs to fit the demands of other people and the world

And coping mechanisms can bring relief, but at the same time, they are sometimes in essence restructuring how you allocate energy so you can more efficiently suppress what your body communicates.

People get stuck hurting themselves because their selves are the only person they have any power over, and their aggression demands hurting and attacking as a way of defense. It is essential to turn your aggression away from punishing and hurting yourself. But you also can't get rid of it, it is part of you

And it is vital to feel specifically private and unjustified anger and fear—anger and fear that is not socially and culturally sanctioned and acknowledged. By this I mean you can't heal your relationship to these emotions exclusively through things that everyone agrees are normal to feel like that about, because you have to fully face and confront yourself stripped of all frameworks conferred by authority and acknowledge that your reality and what you feel, exactly as you feel and perceive and experience it, is Real and has a fundamental right to exist regardless of your society and culture's acknowledgement or endorsement.

So I think your fear and anger asks: Where will I go to live? when you try to do the coping mechanisms, and crucially, she's gotta live somewhere. You can't only do breathing exercises and practice nice words and say "Okay I don't have the Rage anymore" because it's like cutting out a predator's teeth and claws, you lose that really crucial defending and self advocating part and mistake the sadly declawed predator for a predator that is comfortable enough that the claws are never seen.

basically, the hate is the part of you that says "No. You get to have this. You have a right to this, to destruction and ugliness and hate and rage, to Be in all of the ways that are made possible by all corners of the psyche, whether or not it is ever approved by a single other person ever ever ever." And it is right. There is no moral or ethical obligation to be healthy or to heal, and since sick and hurting people are less useful, part of you screams I THRIVE AND DWELL IN SICKNESS I AM SUFFICIENT

And it's not bad. That part is not bad. You have to make a place for it.

[headspace-hotel]

I...tried to make a meme and got carried away and made A Thing that is like partially unfinished because i spent like 3 hours on it and then got tired.

I think this is mostly scientifically accurate but truth be told, there seems to be relatively little research on succession in regards to lawns specifically (as opposed to like, pastures). I am not exaggerating how bad they are for biodiversity though—recent research has referred to them as "ecological deserts."

Feel free to repost, no need for credit

[triplicatebullet]

genuine good-faith question- does anyone have advice about how to do this safely wrt ticks? like i get the ticks dot pngs are being used as a joke here but tick diseases are fucking brutal. growing up in the northeast I've personally seen Lyme disease decimate too many people's immune systems to want to risk it. even with a rigorous bug spray/long clothing/body checking system we would still find ticks inside the house April-Nov. the only thing that worked for us, short of spraying pesticides, was keeping the grass brutally short. (also chickens, while we had them, but they ripped up the lawn anyways.)

[headspace-hotel]

first thing, if you find ticks in the house it might be worthwhile to check and see if there's not a place in the walls they're coming in. Ticks are attracted to their hosts by the carbon dioxide they give off, which means they can in some cases be attracted to your house. If you have mice in your house that can also bring them in. Also indoor/outdoor cats, birds nesting in the attic, etc?

Tick prevalence varies a lot even within regions, and it's possible that you just gotta do everything possible to keep the leggy hordes at bay, which is fine. From the research I have read, it may not be possible to do much within your own yard to change the tick populations, since they are affected by characteristics of environment a larger scale. However, if you wanted to have a wilder garden while minimizing contact with ticks, there are ways to make it less risky.

Qualities of a garden that make it harder for ticks to survive, and qualities of a garden that make it harder for ticks to bite you specifically, are different things. I like to focus on the latter because most of the former is likely beyond your control.

Ticks don't fly or jump and they don't move very fast. Basically, they climb up on top of a blade of grass or a leaf and wait for something to brush up against it so they can grab on. When they are done feeding from a host, they just fall off. In this way, animals that move a lot from place to place can move ticks around. Ticks are vulnerable to drying out, so they've mostly gotta stay in areas that stay damp or shaded.

Cutting a lawn really short means the ground is getting baked in sun, which is generally bad news for ticks, and crucially, it also means not very much of your body comes into contact with plants when you go outside. However, a lawn doesn't entirely protect you from ticks, and in some cases, it may not even reduce their presence.

(Over the past year, i've gotten 2 ticks on me from grass that had just been mowed, and 0 from being in the woods. One of the 2 I found on my shoe after walking through fresh grass clippings. So I don't like it when people say that lawns protect you from ticks...because they don't.)

What I would recommend personally is designing a garden with a few concentric rings of "tick exclusion moat" separating plantings. The idea being to make it harder for ticks to migrate closer to your house, and to allow you to care for and enjoy the plantings without having to tramp all through them. So, keep everything cut short immediately surrounding your house, and surrounding you can have patches or bars of meadow-type plantings in a ring or half circle, and beyond that, another 8-10 foot wide path of short grass, pebbles etc, and then you can have a half-circle or band of meadow plantings, and the idea is that it is difficult for ticks to invade the areas closest to your house because they must cross several hostile areas.

Remove invasive species, particularly Amur honeysuckle and Japanese barberry, which are apparently tick magnets. (I have also gotten ticks on me from wintercreeper.) The extremely dense foliage of these species is probably why they are widely planted, but it's also better for ticks. Log and brush piles need to be as far from the house as possible.

Research is unclear on what should be done with leaves—a leaf litter layer helps ticks survive drying out, but piling leaves into a pile may help ticks survive even better. In light of that, I recommend perhaps raking leaves off paths that you use to walk on and scattering them over garden beds in winter?

An open meadow or prairie type environment will be harder for ticks to survive in than a forest-y area with an overstory of trees. If you want trees, conifers are better for inhibiting rocks. That's what the research shows.

However, less ticks overall does not mean a human will get bit by ticks less—walking through a meadow or prairie with tall plants involves WAY more brushing against plants than walking through a forest with a relatively open understory. That's why I make a distinction between those things.

In terms of reducing the risk of getting ticks on you, what you want to do, really, is minimize contact points with foliage and leaves, particularly low-to-the ground foliage. This is largely how I avoid getting them on me in the first place—when walking outdoors I keep very conscious of where I'm touching grass, plants, and leaves and habitually step around or over foliage to avoid brushing against it. I emphasize checking for ticks, but I get fewer ticks on me in the first place than the people around me—minding the way I move through natural environments is probably my main behavioral adaptation to ticks. It's habitual and built from a lifetime of vigilance.

This is why shaping meadow plantings into bands or rings with paths between can be helpful—you can access and tend to everything without wading into it.

It's really hard to say specifics about what to plant to have less ticks, and even harder to say whether that reduces your chances of tick bites, and even that might have little relationship to whether the tick bites can actually make you sick. Safest to say, if you are not actually in lots of physical contact with tall plants and leaves brushing against your body (and avoid getting grass clippings or damp leaves all over you) that is best.

Restoring your back-yard ecosystem to some extent can also help control tick populations via making good habitat for their predators.

Contrary to popular belief, the evidence for opossums as predators of ticks is...sketchy at best. It hasn't been outright disproven, but the study that originally made that claim had major flaws. A subsequent study reviewing stomach contents and scat of opossums did not reveal ticks. Of course, opossums are omnivores, and this study may also have its flaws in methodology; we'd need a large sample size and range of seasonal and habitat conditions to determine for sure.

A wide range of animals prey upon ticks, though most are generalists that eat many different things. A major one is actually ants; a variety of ants seem to kill ticks, but the invasive fire ants in the Southeastern United States in particular kill a lot of them (who would have thought?). Spiders and beetles as well prey upon ticks.

Basically? You want arthropod biodiversity and you want to design the garden in a way where you can move through it and tend to it with minimal brushing up against plants, and have zones that are difficult for ticks to cross. And you want to get rid of invasive shrubs.

As a final note:

Studies have shown that excluding mammals from plots of land actually causes the numbers of ticks collected in those plots to explode—we're talking 2 to 3 times more ticks than controls—and we don't know why. I think the hypothesis is that less mammals causes a great increase in the "questing" foraging behavior of ticks (because, well, duh, they're hungry).

It has also been shown that when ticks have a diversity of host species, they become infected with, and transmit, diseases less.

Both of these things suggest together that defaunation may be partially causing the great increase in tick-borne diseases. It's a wicked problem.

[wegmans]

[academic-ana]

“As early as the 1920s, researchers giving IQ tests to non-Westerners realized that any test of intelligence is strongly, if subtly, imbued with cultural biases… Samoans, when given a test requiring them to trace a route form point A to point B, often chose not the most direct route (the “correct” answer), but rather the most aesthetically pleasing one. Australian aborigines find it difficult to understand why a friend would ask them to solve a difficult puzzle and not help them with it. Indeed, the assumption that one must provide answers alone, without assistance from those who are older and wiser, is a statement about the culture-bound view of intelligence. Certainly the smartest thing to do, when face with a difficult problem, is to seek the advice of more experienced relatives and friends!”

— Jonathan Marks - Anthropology and the Bell Curve (via leofarto)

[lierdumoa]

I was reading an interesting article years ago about collective memory. There have been a lot of thinkpieces over the years about how humans are getting lazier and worse at remembering things thanks to technology. There’s a tendency, particularly in the western world, to behave as if memorization was all people did prior to the internet. 

But outside of artificial school test-taking environments, human beings have always relied on the collective memory of their close peers to keep track of information. Anyone who’s ever worked clothing retail knows that no single employee has the location of every item in the store memorized, but as long as you have enough people working the floor, nobody will ever have to waste time searching for an item because at least one employee is bound to remember which rack it’s on.

TL&DR - brains were never designed to function in isolation. 

Testing the intelligence of an individual in an isolation is never going to give you an accurate idea of a person’s true intellectual potential.

TL&DR TL&DR

Two (or more) heads is better than one.

[capricorn-0mnikorn]

My maternal grandfather was a math professor at the City University of New York. He died before I was born, but he passed a key bit of wisdom to my mother, and she passed it on to me:

The important thing is not knowing the answer, it’s knowing how to find the answer.

It our era of text and alphabets, that’s often knowing how to look something up. But for most of human existence, there were no alphabets. So knowing how to find the answer meant finding the person who knew the answer.

All human knowledge is cooperative.

[anarchistmemedistro]

intelligence is a myth

[recoverr-a-deactivated20210530]

making friends (especially after you’ve lost a couple or several ones) can be hard and incredibly isolating. finding people we can connect and be vulnerable with is no easy task, so often we feel like it’s a moral failure when things don’t work out between us and someone else. just know there are so many people in this world you have yet to meet who will love you and it’s okay to drop all this heavy relationship baggage now. you’re not defined by the people you’ve lost.

[callese]

[2spirit-1spoon]

🙃🙃🙃🙃🙃

[skyvoice]

you know what. i am physically sick as hell this week so i'll bite. i read the original slate article, which is free to read so i don't know why OP chose to screenshot instead of let people draw their own conclusions. i agree with MANY of the writer's points on the need for comprehensive criminal justice reform, but i also care a lot about numbers and stats and increasingly, this bullshit "democrats are the same as republicans" messaging is straight-up delivered using propaganda tactics

this is going to be an incredibly long post and i had to use GOOGLE SLIDES and GOOGLE SHEETS which i hate so so much so in the words of twitter kpop stans please don't let this flop

let's look at the numbers, claim by claim

claim #1: "the number of people held in ICE detention has increased by 70 percent since Biden took office"

if you click through 3 link layers from the slate you land at cbs as the source for this which tells you that mainstream media is certainly not immune to playing with stats to make the democrats look bad

fortunately ICE detention stats are easily publicly available thanks to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, which does the lord's work of crawling through federal agency publications and submitting tedious FOIA requests to collate useful data

here is the data -- not only was cbs not wrong about the total number of detainees at the time of publication (25k in aug 2021), but the increase from when biden was inaugurated is actually 90%, not 70%. look:

well holy shit!!! that's terrible. biden is the worst and he hates immigration reform and the democrats are no different from trump, right?

but if you zoom out

actually, Jan/Feb 2021 was at the absolute low for detainees, after a full year of covid restrictions slowing down or minimizing gov't operations of all kinds AND reducing border volume

and if you actually want to compare the biden admin to the trump admin?

relative to Aug of 2019, after 18 months the biden admin has reached a 56% decrease in the number of detainees. even if you look at only the month before COVID lockdowns really hit, it's still nearly a 40% decrease

and to put the total numbers in perspective, at NO point before COVID did the trump admin have fewer than 30k people in ICE detention. most of the time it was well above 40k, or about 2x more than under biden

that's not to say that immigration reform isn't still needed, but it IS to say that myopically comparing current-state to january 2021, aka one of the WEIRDEST months statistically on record ever, is going to give you crap perspective

claim #2: "the federal prison population has grown for the first time in a decade"

by now we know that federal data is public so let's go look for it

and indeed the federal bureau of prisons has made 45 years of federal prison data available for download

so this should be straightforward! it looks like the inmate population did in fact peak in 2013, the start of obama's second term, before decreasing. obama made reducing the number of people in prison one of his key focuses and was in fact the first president since jimmy carter (term 1977-1981) to leave office with fewer inmates than when he started

this trend continued under trump. in fact, the rate of decrease at the end of trump's presidency was even bigger than obama's -- turns out the republicans were BETTER than the democrats at criminal justice reform?!

(it is worth noting at this moment of sarcasm that a bipartisan group of senators did actually manage to get the First Step Act bill through the senate gauntlet and onto trump's desk for signature, which lowered some sentences)

(note i've only included data from 2005 onward so it's easier to actually see what's going on in the last 10 years. for those who like math, these are CAGRs calculated over each presidential term)

but there it is -- decline in populations accelerated under trump. surely both parties same. surely democrats actually worse than republicans

but wait, what's that?

that can't be ...

SPIDERS GEORG????

WHAT ARE YOU DOING HERE

ARE YOU SAYING THAT ... THERE IS AN OUTLIER?

THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN COUNTED?

so it turns out that under trump, the trend had decelerated to less than half the rate of change at the end of obama's last term

that precipitous drop we see is ... covid. it's pretty much just covid, during which federal prisons stopped accepting new prisoners, courts were closed and couldn't hand down sentences, and parole officers weren't sending people in for minor violations

here's what things might have looked like had there been no covid outlier:

now that assumes trump wasn't successful at slowing down the momentum from the obama years

this is what it might have looked like had we perhaps ended up with a second trump term:

again this isn't to say that biden is pure and perfect on criminal justice, even if there were some agreed-upon definition of what pure and perfect legislative or policy priorities would look like

it's to put the context back into place around the data

are the democrats and republicans actually the same or are we being fed a diet of pruned stats and catchphrases to make us simultaneously angry and disempowered

last claim: "federal covid relief funds are being used to pad local police budgets"

you know what, this one is relatively not decontextualized

for example, $10B of ARPA grants to state and local gov'ts has been committed to “public safety programs, including domestic violence prevention efforts, drug abuse and mental health services, and bonuses for hiring and retaining police officers”

it's hard to know how much went to cops, but knowing how much cops take up of local jurisdiction budgets it's unfortunately probably a significant share

biden doesn't help his case by going on record telling states and local jurisdictions to use ARPA funds to shore up before summer, when crime typically goes up (same source as link above)

that said in the grand scheme of even just ARPA funds, this is what $10B looks like, so like ... is this the hill to die on

SO all of that to say

we don't stop pushing for immigration or criminal justice reform

or any other reform that is sorely needed

but using data in incredibly selective ways, out of context, to promote a narrative that somehow democrats are the same or even worse than republicans

ESPECIALLY the republicans of today

is literally propaganda

propaganda by definition uses kernels of truth and then presents it in a biased way to attempt to push a narrative

pretending that the democrats are exactly the same as the republicans is propaganda, and i'm like 80% sure it's right-wing propaganda designed to discourage left-wing turnout that has somehow been accepted by an online population that doesn't understand statistics

so like

understand statistics

do a bit of research

draw conclusions that you can back up

and for fuck's sake, vote

[biglawbear]

God thank you so much for this detail. I knew OP was bullshit but didn't have the time or energy for this level of clap back. Bless.

The left is not immune to propaganda. If you see something that enrages you... Maybe read the article? Do your own research? Don't just believe everything you read on Tumblr?

Also OP literally just copies tweets that make it seem like Democrats Are Bad with no context. Which, in 2016, was a Russian psyop play. It's helpful to know what agenda someone has when they post things.

[headspace-hotel]

I love how Spiders Georg has become a standard illustrative example for why outliers matter and can lead to misleading statistics.

[countesspetofi]

As my Grandma always said, “Figures don’t lie, but liars can figure.”

[mortalityplays]

one of the most important things, perhaps the most important thing I have learned in my life is that nice people can fuck each other up in monstrous ways. people can be bone deep kind and loving and self reflective and still lash out under pressure. people can be earnestly neighbourly and charitable and hospitable and generous and still find themselves in situations where they become selfish. people can be well meaning and easygoing and gregarious and hold deep seated opinions that turn them into vicious little bullies under the right conditions. nobody is just one thing, and nobody stays one way. every person is a kaleidoscope and they will surprise you. you will surprise yourself. it's not a warning and it's not a judgement and it's not an excuse, and it's certainly not a reason to stop trying or to stop trusting. it is just a fact.

[peggy-sue-reads-a-book]

With the holidays coming up this is everyone’s reminder to

Ask little kids if they’d like a hug first

If they say no, verbally affirm the reasonable shit you just heard. “You said you wouldn’t like a hug. We won’t hug.”

You don’t even have to redirect with a high five, even though that’s fine. Touching isn’t for everyone.

Do not say upsetting things like “where is my hug?” Clown, you don’t own hugs.

It is fine to model consent by placing boundaries on touch. “Let’s wash your hands before we cuddle.” “I’m leaving this couch if you continue to yeet your foot into my pregnant belly.” “that was fun but I’m going to take a break now.”

Touchy children are not inherently sweeter. Love languages exist at any age.

Some kids like touch but not eye contact. A hug from behind is a good one or “let’s close our eyes and squeeze really tight. Ready?”

I’m dead f*ing serious there are people who want your physical affection so badly but need you to modify your approach. Just like there are people who want to get into buildings but need ramps.

Don’t comment if a kid shows affection to another adult but not you. They’re weird like that but you don’t have to make it weirder.

[msmkcreates]

Can we normalize doing nothing, please?

I work with kids. These kids are at my program before and after school, and then some of them have sports/dance/music sometimes all of the above before they finally go home, eat dinner, and go to sleep. Then rinse and repeat everyday, and games and more classes on the weekend, etc.

I’m all for extracurriculars, but this turns into the teen who is not only in the school play, but they’re on the newspaper, the football team, and seven different clubs. In college they take double the courseloads, and then once they graduate…what?

They work themselves raw because they arent used to downtime. They’ve been told they can always be doing something, and they don’t know how to relax. This turns into the adult that has anxiety because there’s nothing left to clean, the adult that desperately wants to watch that TV show but can’t force themselves to sit long enough for it.

Then they turn into the moms and dads who spend all their free time ferrying their kids to extracurriculars.

Like, these kids don’t know what downtime is? I told a kid I did nothing last weekend, and he looked at me like I was crazy. He asked what I was doing this weekend and I said “Probably sleeping, mostly,” and he actually gasped. Then he rattled off a bunch of things I could do, to which I had to stop him.

“No, you don’t understand. I plan on sleeping. I’m booked.”

“But you could–”

“Nah. I’m just gonna rest.”

It was as if I had said a bad word or something. I asked what he does when he gets sick, and he says he goes to practice anyway. I asked him what he does if he doesn’t feel like going, and he said he goes anyway. I asked when he takes time to rest, and he said when he sleeps at night.

Bring back lazy Sundays. Bring back Saturday morning cartoons. Bring back the idea of relaxing and soaking in your day before moving into the next thing. Bring back the right to breathe, the right to rest.

Bring back mental health days, and taking a break. Bring back taking a walk or watching a show or setting a timer to remind yourself to stop cleaning and relax.

If you’re running at 100% all the time with no time to recharge, then your battery is going to die spectacularly, and probably at the worst possible time.

[chordata7]

Mood

[lokeanrampant]

Society is trying to burn us all out.  Tell society to fuck off.

Go take a fucking nap.  You’ve more than earned it and you deserve it.

We HAVE to recharge.  Our bodies, our minds, our everything requires it.  

[heroofthreefaces]

My dad told me when I was young that the way to take a vacation is to work on something different and I thought, and still think, that that’s the most obscene idea anyone’s ever told me to my face.

[thebyrchentwigges]

I don’t know where this came from but I NEEDED it

[malcolm-f-tucker]

Image ID: blue text on a cream background which reads “Nine types of rest. 1) time away 2) permission to not be helpful 3) something “unproductive” 4) connection to art and nature 5) solitude to recharge 6) a break from responsibility 7) stillness to decompress 8) safe space 9) alone time at home”. End ID.

[teathattast]

tis the season