Untitled @yaoi-tiddie-expert - Tumblr Blog

Documented evidence of war crimes in Gaza and the West Bank.

Autumn Hill left a Prairieland ICE facility protest before it turned violent. She was still sentenced to 50 years as part of Trump's war on

They're sending a trans woman to prison for life over the fact that she attended an anti-ICE protest where a cop died (she had already left the protest when the 'violence' started)

enba-and-luka

st-just

Shoutout to that very funny blip in French history where it was basically accepted that the king would have a wife (diplomatic concerns, ensuring the bloodline), an 'official' mistress (helping manage court and household affairs, patronage, sometimes surprisingly large roles in royal administration) and then also potentially several women he just actually wanted to have sex with.

booksandchainmail

The maîtresse-en-titre (French: [mɛtʁɛs ɑ̃ titʁ]) was the official royal mistress of the King of France.[1] The title was vaguely defined and used in the Middle Ages but finally became an acknowledged, if informal, position during the reign of Henry IV (r. 1589–1610), and continued through the reign of Louis XV (r. 1715–1774). It was a semi-official position which came with its own apartments, estates and a title if the woman did not have any.[2] Some individuals having this position acquired significant power and more influence than the Queen of France, as some mistresses were known to advise the King of France in state affairs if he was so infatuated, broker favors for clients, elevate others in social mobility, forge alliances and negotiate with foreign diplomats.[3] In contrast, the title petite maîtresse was the title of a mistress who was not officially acknowledged.

^ from wikipedia

I can't find the exact citation now, but apparently one of Madame du Barry's jobs as Louis XV's official mistress was arranging his assignations, and she was blamed for his death since he got smallpox from a prostitute she hired for him

twinkhole-destroyer

I need to press his bruises like it’s his gspot

twinkhole-destroyer

I’m gonna think about killing myself

happybunnykat

shamebats

Imo the best type of system for children to grow up in would be one that assumes the birth parents/primary guardians won't do shit and takes care of every aspect of childcare that's essential for their wellbeing and development, collectively.

shamebats

But I'm just a guy who only learned how to brush his teeth properly and got glasses as a child because we had both a dentist and a doctor come to school on a regular basis. The dentist would have us all stand in a circle with our little toothbrushes and show us how to brush and correct our technique. The doctors would give us general health assessments and then have the teachers contact our patents and essentially peer pressure them into getting us any health intervention we needed. My parents only reluctantly got me glasses because they knew the teachers would judge them if they kept seeing me sit in the very front row and still squint to see the chalkboard. So I'm biased.

shamebats

The only times I ever remember seeing a dentist or doctor as a child was at school. I'm quite healthy physically and I'm very grateful for all the care I got from the various professionals who cared about my well-being and development more than my actual parents did.

We had free healthcare including dental, mind you, my parents just couldn't be bothered. When my brother, as a teenager, asked our mother if she could take him to his orthodontist appointments (which he'd already arranged for on his own) she basically told him she didn't feel like it and he had to take the bus.

If I could improve anything about that system, I'd take it even further and make it so kids could see a doctor and get meds, treatments, therapy, tests, disability aids etc. without having to rely on their parents as well. I shouldn't have had to put up with being bullied and guilt-tripped about the family finances and the time investment needed to take me to the optometrist every time I needed new glasses.

shamebats

Some parents would not take care of their children even if they were given all the time and the resources. Mine are a great example of that — my mother stopped working and became a homemaker when I was in kindergarten, my father worked from the garage and was also always home. They had a car and our village even had a bus that would come once or twice an hour that would take you to the next two bigger cities.

Did that, plus the free healthcare, translate into them actually parenting and caring for us properly? It did not. They only ever did any of that reluctantly when not doing it would make them look bad, and most of the time they did a shitty job because they could never resist the urge to boost their egos by means of bullying literal children.

So I have to wonder: what did they actually contribute to our upbringing? Like they didn't teach us shit and mostly they just endangered our mental and physical health — but hey, at least they gave me cPTSD! That took some work too.

anarchistmemedistro

see also family abolition, and youth liberation .

applefae

A knee-jerk response to neglectful parenting I see a lot is “people should have to get licenses and take rigorous tests to PROVE that they should be ALLOWED to have kids” which is eugenics. That’s just the starting line for eugenics.

We are at a point in humanity where there is no meaningful reason why we shouldn’t be structuring our societies around wellbeing for all instead of wellbeing for the “deserving”.

Assume some parents will fail. Build social infrastructure that is designed to support failed kids rather than punish would-be parents.

queer-riot-dragon

Parents do not have to be neglectful to fail!

They can be busy, tired, stressed about finances, ignorant, etc. They can want to do the best for their kid and Fail Anyways.

The best thing is to support the children and give them the tools they need to succeed even if the parents are already giving them those tools. Because you can never learn something too much.

lessproblematical

Also sometimes parents become disabled or die and family can't always be counted on, and sometimes there isn't other family

xylophonetangerine

What the fuck does that even mean??

cipheramnesia

Guy who's learning about "reading things" for the first time.

somethingusefulfromflorida

This will be the new tumblr

captain-price-returns

Starmer is rushing legislation through parliament that experts say threatens free speech, public interest journalism and international human

radishnt

which one of u was going to tell me that tea tastes different if u put it in hot water?

mothman-misato

y- you were putting it in cold water?????

boimgfrog

Radish. Answer the question radish.

radishnt

yeah??? i thought for like. 5 years that ppl just put it in hot water 2 speed up the tea-ification process didn’t realize there was an actual reason

boimgfrog

You dont have the patience to microwave water for 3 minutes???

catsnraincoats

[ID: Tags reading “u think i have the patience to boil water wtf ?????” /End ID]

why are you. putting it in the microwave to boil it

boimgfrog

Do you think I have the patience to boil water on the stove

catsnraincoats

Its takes less than a minute

boimgfrog

Bestie is ur stovetop powered by the fucking sun

catsnraincoats

How long does it take you to boil a cup of water on the stove

boimgfrog

Like seven minutes

catsnraincoats

Just stick the mug on top of the stove on medium heat n it boils in like two minutes… less than that is u use a saucepan…

boimgfrog

Crying you’re putting the whole mug on the stove ???? On medium heat???? Ur stove is enchanted

pidoop

Every single person in this post is a fucking lunatic

silverjirachi

Yet another post that reads like four shakespeare characters who come out in the middle of the play to talk about something completely unrelated for comic relief

wizardlyghost

(Enter RADISHN’T, MOTHMAN MISATO, BOIMG FROG and CATS'N RAINCOATS, stage left. They are having a HEATED DISCUSSION.)

RADISHN’T: Prithee, which one of you had planned to tell

Of diff'rent flavours gained by simple act

Of brewing tea with water hot, not cold?

MOTHMAN: Egad! you poured the water cold? Wherefore?!

FROG: An answer from you, Radish, I must beg.

RADISHN’T: Indeed I did, dear friends - why does this shock?

Without the guide of others I assumed

That heat was merely added for the sake

Of expediting this solution’s brewing!

Half a decade I have spent, or more,

Not questioning this worldview I had made.

In fact, I am myself a bit surprised

That you might think that I, your dearest friend,

Might have a patience of sufficient stock

To wait until a pot of water boils.

FROG: Three minutes overtaxes patience so?

The microwave will beep when it is done!

CATS'N: My friend, this answer vexes me the more!

Can it be true that thou dost boil by nuke?!

FROG: Are you in turn, my friend, so shocked to know

That I have not the patience, like our Root,

To boil upon the stove our favour’d drink?

CATS'N: It takes less than a minute!

FROG: On what plate?

Perhaps your dinner cooks atop the sun?

CATS'N: How long can take your stove to fill the task

Of boiling but a single cup alone?

FROG: In minutes?

CATS'N: Yes!

FROG: I counted seven, once.

CATS'N: Perhaps you ought to have your timepiece checked!

If on a middle heat you place the cup

You soon will have the scalding drink you crave.

Two minutes, in a mug upon the plate

Or even less, if you should have a pot.

FROG: You cause me tears - is this how thou dost live?

You place upon the iron stove a mug?

A mug, ceramic, filled with water cold?

How do these flames, though medium in height,

Not shatter like a glass this fragile thing?

Surely, then, your kitchen is bewitched

With magicks far beyond the mortal ken!

(The FOUR realise they have wandered into the THRONE ROOM. The ROYAL COURT watches with fascination.)

KING: Ev'ry single person in this group must be a fucking lunatic, it seems.

elodieunderglass

dustyxoverture

I’m sorry but the THOUGHT that has been put into this, I actually CAN’T—

The fact that nearly every line is so metrically considered- near perfect iambic pentameter witb the occasional trochee for emphasis, but usually retaining a strong sense of rhythm nonetheless. And then the king comes in at the end, so wound in his disbelief that his response is reduced to prose.

And the even better thing about this is how easy it would have been to structure the king’s line into iambic pentameter: it is effectively already said as such because of the way wizardlyghost has phrased it, yet they haven’t!! They did not break the line, rendering what, by all typically of both Shakespearean canon and other periods context should be the character with the most command and authority in the whole play. If there was ever a more effective way to convey a genuine “what the fuck??”, I know of it not.

But it gets better!! Shakespeare regularly uses meter in order to represent class divide; the nobility usually speak in iambic pentameter, save for a few particularly chosen moments (e.g. Lady Macbeth’s descent into madness, Othello’s realisation of Desdemona’s “betrayal”) or just lines where Shakespeare needs to suggest high emotion or when a character is lost in thought. Supernatural characters like the fairies in A Midsummer Night’s Dream and the Witches in Macbeth usually speak in trochaic tetrameter, an inversion of iambic pentameter. Lower class characters, particularly those used for comic relief (usually under the influence of alcohol), speak with no structure at all: their language is plain prose. Therefore, if this is a conversation between these types of characters, as the prompt from silvergirachi suggests, why the hell are the characters speaking so eloquently???

Now, this is Tumblr. It is subsequently logical to assume that this may have merely been a humorous recreation (and a very good one at that) of the Shakespearean style in a way that is widely recognisable to an audience that may or may not have read a great deal of Shakespeare, which is understandable. However, logic is boring so I’m going to probe further into this to the point where future historians will look to this as an example of overanalysing.

The inherent eloquence of the characters here suggests an unusual subversion of the roles typically assumed in Shakespearean comedy. This could be interpreted along two major avenues: firstly, that the rhetoric displayed by the speakers is fundamentally representative of how truth can be expected even from the most seemingly pointless or ludicrous discussions. Furthermore, it could suggest that it matters not how well constructed your speeches are: if you talk bullshit, it’s going to sound that way despite your attempts to hide it.

This is similar but not identical to the second avenue of interpretation: there is the implication that the noblemen in the play are in fact the comic relief characters, therefore implying that the “common people” of the play are the ones whose influence, though not expressed in such a highly spoken manner, makes a lot more sense than whatever the hell this is. If this was a real Shakespeare play, I would call it a subtle exploration into the innate corruption of the rich and powerful. Well done, op.

Now, I doubt any of this is actually grounded analysis in any way, shape or form, but if someone else can take this to the extremes of writing a Shakespearean scene, why can I not analyse it as such? And where else to do so than Tumblr?

wizardlyghost

im in tears i didnt think anyone would put this much analysis into this‚ thank you so much

whetstonefires

i also like that everyone else gets a version of their handle and then tumblr user pidoop is promoted to king

writethebirds

headspace-hotel

YES i am sexualizing the relationship between parasitic orchids and fungi

headspace-hotel

@egregiousderp sorry for posting a conventionally attractive parasitic relationship

fini-mun

Was working on a panel and then suddenly I decided to live vicariously through Tails and have him address the important things in life.

computationalcalculator

nerdy-as-heck

I saw this and felt like it should be shared here too

rubaedo

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grimes

vampire-loving-vampire

hey white people . if u dont know how to pronounce an ethnic persons name *google it* or if its someone ur talking directly to *ask them*. dont fucking do that "erm i dont know how to pronounce but __" or "im gonna butcher this haha" or "im not even gonna bother trying" . ur not funny. do u know what poc think when they hear u saying that ? u sound like a loser asshole and we dont want to spend time with u . im so fucking tired of watching youtube videos about media from my country and hearing those phrases. im tired of people saying that to my face . i respect someone who clearly looked it up and is tryong but says my name wrong over someone who just goes with whatever bad first guess they had without trying. u have too many resources at ur disposal to keep doing this. for the love of god just Fucking Try. if ur confused Just Try.

despair-tea

I highly recommend Forvo.com, the website where native speakers of a language contribute their time and voices to read words and names in their own language. It is a fantastic way to expand your world, open up your ears, and it's way more likely to nab a hit than just googling.

vampire-loving-vampire

wow , I didn't know this existed, thanks so much for sharing the resource !! I will absolutely be using it now too 🖤

queerpyracy

I keep getting in trouble for referring to my spouse as 'my woman.' That's who she is to me--wanch ngatharam, and I'm pam nungantam, her man. Apparently that bit of paleo-misogyny loses something in translation for the metro middle-class people I'm attempting to mingle with lately, so I've had to alter my language and start saying 'my spouse.' The problem lies in the cultural baggage that comes with the possessive form in English grammar, and with the language of property law. In our Aboriginal communities, when people first meet you they will often ask, 'Who own you?' This doesn't signify a property relation--it is all about what groups, pairs and lands you belong to in your relationships, which are governed collectively. Belonging and ownership means something completely different from possession in our world. It means being in relation to family and community and place. Your belongings are not your property, but your connections. This worldview is not very compatible with the political economies, legal systems and marketplaces we must interact with to survive.

Tyson Yunkaporta, Right Story, Wrong Story