Product Placement
ellievsbear
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
taylor price
pixel skylines
JBB: An Artblog!
NASA
Love Begins
oozey mess
Xuebing Du
cherry valley forever
todays bird
we're not kids anymore.
祝日 / Permanent Vacation
No title available
Stranger Things
⁂
shark vs the universe
🪼
$LAYYYTER
seen from Japan
seen from United States
seen from Austria
seen from Sweden
seen from Brazil
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Singapore
seen from Australia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Italy
seen from Italy
seen from United States
seen from France
seen from Italy
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
@z0mborb
hey! im spacer. she/her. the only rule i have for my asks is dont be boring. i am over 18, for anyone who needs to know
there may be minor kink jokery going on in this blog. i will never reblog actual kink art or recount actual kink experiences here, though
FLY is a story about a boy who gets a second chance. Help his story take flight June 9th 11am EST on Kickstarter. Thank you for being the wind beneath my wings I hope this story lifts the world to a brighter place.
A coming of age story about Black kids who finally have power to fight back against systems designed against them.
graffiti discourse is so stupid why the hell would I give a shit if people spraypaint their names or do some cool paintings under a bridge
sorry didn't realize the bridge has to be plain beige concrete. that was a load bearing plain beige concrete if anyone tags it the whole bridge collapses
graffiti discourse is so stupid why the hell would I give a shit if people spraypaint their names or do some cool paintings under a bridge
sorry didn't realize the bridge has to be plain beige concrete. that was a load bearing plain beige concrete if anyone tags it the whole bridge collapses
currently overhearing two college students on a train platform, one with a very thick french(?) accent, debate the definition of "bourgeoise" prescriptively versus descriptively. it's getting passionate. they're citing specific chapters of marx at each other. i think they're both transgender. is this disco elysium
"are you a marxist?"
"was adorno a marxist?"
"...yes!?"
Once when I was in undergrad, someone described something as “problematic” in class and our professor was like, “That’s cool, but ‘problematic’ doesn’t really mean anything. It means that the thing you’re describing has a problem, and in and of itself that’s not bad. Art, especially, should always have problems, or else it’s not interesting and not art, either. It sounds like you’re trying to say that this is bad, but you don’t want to say ‘bad.’ Is that right?”
So from then on whenever one of us called something problematic, he would make us talk it out until we could name the “bad” thing we were hinting at. In this particular class, 7/10 it was some type of oppression, and the remainder was like, “I’m uncomfortable because this is very new/confusing/pushing boundaries that made me feel safe.”
Once we stopped calling things “problematic” and stopping at that, class got way more interesting and... we all had to say, like, “that’s racist” or “that’s misogynistic” or “ew capitalism gross” out loud, which a lot of us had never done in a classroom before. Or we had to be like, “Uhhh... I’m not sure what’s so bad?” and confront our own beliefs and that was maybe even more useful.
Anyway. Whenever I see the word problematic, I can’t help but think of this professor being like, “Good starting point, now let’s get specific.” I think when we have to commit to saying “that’s ___” it requires a lot more careful thought about the truth and impact and complexities of whatever we’re claiming. Sometimes there really is some bullshit afoot, and also sometimes it’s art, and it should be full of problems, because that’s what art is.
I'm fully 100% on board with "Know why you think things, and be able to explain the reasoning", I'm always saying this
...but can someone explain the "Art should always have problems, or else it’s not interesting and not art"; what the hell does this mean? Why would you ever want something to have problems?
I think it's less saying that, and more saying "art will always have problems; art is made by people, and people are fallible, and even the best thing you've ever read/played/heard/watched has problems, and thus saying 'this art is problematic' is sort of a useless statement on a macro scale because yeah, all art has problems"
Once when I was in undergrad, someone described something as “problematic” in class and our professor was like, “That’s cool, but ‘problematic’ doesn’t really mean anything. It means that the thing you’re describing has a problem, and in and of itself that’s not bad. Art, especially, should always have problems, or else it’s not interesting and not art, either. It sounds like you’re trying to say that this is bad, but you don’t want to say ‘bad.’ Is that right?”
So from then on whenever one of us called something problematic, he would make us talk it out until we could name the “bad” thing we were hinting at. In this particular class, 7/10 it was some type of oppression, and the remainder was like, “I’m uncomfortable because this is very new/confusing/pushing boundaries that made me feel safe.”
Once we stopped calling things “problematic” and stopping at that, class got way more interesting and... we all had to say, like, “that’s racist” or “that’s misogynistic” or “ew capitalism gross” out loud, which a lot of us had never done in a classroom before. Or we had to be like, “Uhhh... I’m not sure what’s so bad?” and confront our own beliefs and that was maybe even more useful.
Anyway. Whenever I see the word problematic, I can’t help but think of this professor being like, “Good starting point, now let’s get specific.” I think when we have to commit to saying “that’s ___” it requires a lot more careful thought about the truth and impact and complexities of whatever we’re claiming. Sometimes there really is some bullshit afoot, and also sometimes it’s art, and it should be full of problems, because that’s what art is.
we all had a pjackk dead wife flashback today
awww the like button turns into a rainbow when you press it! that's so cute...hey staff what's with all the trans women you keep nuking?
i think we should be ridiculing them more for this. you don't get to try and go all "queer website" when your staff likes to go on nuking sprees targeting the trans fem users
‘The biggest rollback of disability rights in a generation’ – Charities respond to Supreme Court ruling
The uk Supreme Court has just done a major rollback on disability rights and is putting more disabled people in danger
Under this new ruling, multiple vulnerable groups will be impacted across social care and healthcare sectors. If an autistic person with high support needs, someone with a serious mental illness, or a person with a severe learning disability is locked in a care setting and sedated, but does not actively protest, they will no longer be considered "confined" by the state. They will lose their automatic right to independent reviews, a legal advocate, and protection from closed care cultures.
This ruling states if someone is sedated and does not instigate a complaint regarding their circumstances while ACTIVELY SEDATED, then they have no right to legal checks and balances to preserve their wellbeing??? Is this correct??? The UK is falling apart.
Meanwhile this is the headline the BBC chose to run with.
My landlord pasted an ai generated ass eviction notice on my door because you have to cite a reason and he doesn’t have one so he just chopped that section out brother you cannot be serious
Would you like the added layer that he did this right after I tested for mold in my house and it was quite literally in every room and he came here to check out the hole in my ceiling that he has left unrepaired for two years
im gonna fight this in any way I can obviously but I want out of here as soon as possible I can’t get a new place until the end of this month but I do need to save for movers and a moving truck and a deposit. I also live with my mom who is severely disabled and I take care of which makes things more complicated. If you want to help my Cash App and Venmo are @ ishaanjs obviously nobody is obligated to give anything and thank you if you do
cool. another black child died in a hate crime
A South Carolina jury on Monday found a store owner not guilty of murder in the 2023 shooting of a Black 14-year-old.
apparently the murder happened in 2023 after doing some research but the murderer has been found not guilty.
black children get murdered and become victims of hate crimes every fucking day. this is ridiculous
im posting this here despite the website being extremely white centered, I want people to understand how in this country it's basically ok to murder and victimize black people, especially women and children in the name of "self defense" and white America will reward you for your antiblackness.
A South Carolina gas station owner was charged with murder on Monday after allegedly shooting and killing a 14-year-old boy he believed was
The headlines of the two articles don't really convey how fucking horrible this was. To anyone scrolling by who wasn't going to click on the links, here is a short summary:
The store owner got his gun out, and he and his son started chasing the 14-year-old boy, because they FALSELY believed he stole FOUR BOTTLES OF WATER.
The boy who was being CHASED WITH A GUN FOR NO REASON did carry a gun, and it would have been very much justified to actually take it out (because he feared for his life since he was being CHASED WITH A GUN FOR NO REASON), but witnesses never saw it in his hands, and at no point did he actually point it at his two pursuers. He had his back towards them the entire time because he was FLEEING.
The kid stumbled and fell, dropping his gun in the process. The gun was only ever seen on the ground next to his body, it probably fell from his waistband or pocket or whatever, not his hands. And since it was dropped, he did not have it on him AT ALL when he was murdered. He was SHOT IN THE BACK WHILE LYING UNARMED ON THE GROUND.
The sheriff's report written in 2023 said that this was "not a bias-motivated incident" even though there is literally zero ambiguity that this man was just itching to shoot a Black kid. There is no other explanation for why you would take your gun out and chase him more than 100 yards over a vague, weak, unfounded suspicion that he might have stolen four (4) bottles of water. In and of itself, the train of thought "this Black kid was holding four bottles of water at some point, and now he's leaving the store, clearly there's no chance that he simply put them back, he must have stolen them" is already racist as hell. But the cops say "well there's absolutely no indication that shooting an unarmed 14-year-old Black boy because you falsely suspected him of stealing a few dollars worth of water was motivated by bias" because of fucking course they do.
The murderer was found "not guilty" because the self-defence reasoning was accepted even though multiple witnesses confirmed that the kid did not have a gun out as he was running from the store, and definitely did not point it at his pursuers at any point. If anything, the kid would have been the person for whom self-defence would have been justified since he was the one being actively chased with a gun.
David Lynch
There's a recurring online tendency to aestheticize consensus itself. The imagined future village is full of emotionally compatible people who enjoy communal gardening, conflict resolution circles, acoustic folk music, mutual aid potlucks, and repairing bicycles together at sunset. Which is nice for the people who genuinely enjoy that lifestyle. But plenty of humans are solitary, prickly, obsessive, urban, nocturnal, sensory-seeking, technologically attached, contrarian, novelty-seeking, private, or just plain difficult. Those people do not evaporate after the revolution. They do not get Left Behind while you are Raptured into the Utopia. They become your neighbors.
pjackk is pbackk
“be gay do crime! but sex is yucky and crime is wrong!” ass website
okay, we managed to get through the “you can be gay and not have sex” part, and im feeling charitable and i wanna talk about the “do crime” part
so many responses of “its nice that you’re privileged enough to be able to steal from Target willy nilly!” and that’s not at all what this is about. like, yeah, shoplifting and loitering and graffiti and breaking the rules is, obviously, part of “do crime”. but they’re not parts you have to do.
would you help someone get an abortion where it was illegal?
would you help a trans friend get healthcare that had been criminalized?
would you shelter someone fleeing persecution, even if the law said not to?
would you help a gay couple stay together when the state decided their relationship was unlawful?
instead, would you report someone else for breaking the law? will you snitch on your hungry neighbors for stealing food? on your homeless neighbors for sleeping where they’re able?
would you break laws to protect someone you love? a community you love? yourself?
Did you play AD&D? I can't remember how old you are, so hopefully that's not too offensive. If so, was a typical game really as hostile as people say it was?
That's one of those question where the answer hovers somewhere between "no, with a couple of massive caveats" and "yes, but not in the way most people think".
A lot of AD&D 1st Edition's GMing practices are pretty hardass by modern standards; however, they need to be understood in the context that the game's authors were writing for a target audience who mainly played the game in college wargaming clubs, where players would frequently transfer between groups and group sizes tended to be very large – six players per GM was considered a bare minimum, and up to a dozen player characters in a single party was by no means unheard of!
In particular, players would often bring their character sheets with them when hopping between groups, and it was considered a faux pas for a GM to reject an incoming player's existing character or request any substantive changes be made, so managing expectations could be quite challenging; even as late as 2nd Edition, the Dungeon Master's Guide contains extensive discussion of how to gracefully handle players bringing existing characters with them who aren't necessarily a good fit for the present game's tone or resource economy.
The upshot is that the culture of play these iterations of Dungeons & Dragons are targeting inherently obliges the GM to take a much firmer hand to keep things on track than a pickup game that draws players exclusively from within the GM's established friend group might – and to be sure, some GMs abused these expectations to act like petty tyrants, but some contemporary GMs do that, too.
A big part of the modern perception that 1E and 2E were extraordinarily player hostile, meanwhile, has nothing to do with the previously discussed GMing practices; rather, it emerges from the transition away from that culture of play in a slightly unexpected way.
In brief, back when D&D was mainly played by wargaming clubs, it was fashionable to run pre-written adventure modules competitively at conventions; the competition wasn't between players, but between parties, with multiple groups running the same adventure in parallel to contend for prizes. Tournament play sometimes chose its winners based on the fastest real-time completion of the module in question, or set specific objectives within the module which would award points when completed, a bit like speed-running or achievement-hunting in a video game (though neither practice existed yet at the time).
It was the survival module, however, that quickly emerged as the most popular tournament format. In a survival tournament, each player would provide or was furnished with a binder containing a fixed number of pre-generated character sheets, switching to the next character sheet in the set as each preceding character died; the winning group was the one whose last surviving character's corpse hit the dirt furthest from the dungeon entrance.
Many of 1E's most popular adventure modules, including the infamous Tomb of Horrors, were originally written as survival modules to be run at tournaments in conventions. As such, they were designed to kill off player characters both quickly and efficiently, so as to reduce the likelihood that the tournament would run overtime and get kicked out of the convention venue. When they were later cleanup and repackaged as commercial adventure modules, their text rarely bothered to explain any of this – who doesn't recognise a survival module when they see one?
The answer to that question, of course, is kids who didn't come up through the mentorship system of the college wargaming clubs, but taught themselves how to play D&D from first principles using books they bought at their local hobby stores – and when D&D's popularity unexpectedly exploded in the early 1980s, there were suddenly rather a lot of them!
These kids purchased the repackaged survival modules along with all their other D&D books; having no frame of reference, they assumed that these represented what a "standard" D&D adventure was supposed to look like – and since they weren't experienced players with whole binders full of pre-generated backup characters at their fingertips, the result was a lot of seemingly unfair total party kills, and a lot of kids concluding that the previous generation's GMs must have been objectively insane.
There is an additional amusing point of order here, which is the answer to the following two questions. I once had a discussion with someone in Gary Gygax's gaming group, who was involved in early TSR work a bit. Allow me to paraphrase my questions and his answers.
Why publish survival modules as your primary format of published adventure?
"Because that's what we had -- they were already laid out for publication. Why not publish them and make some money off it?"
Did it ever occur to you at the time that publishing adventures like these would shape the larger D&D culture's expectations of what play was supposed to look like?
"No, why would it?"
