Life is what it is.

And the update

I've been collecting the best Jorts tweets and waiting until the moment he showed up on my dash to post them. So here you are, the curated best of the past, oh, day or so:

Dog piñata!

oh you mean the essay about how spirit untamed is legitimately the most evil thing i have ever seen and knowledge of its existence caused me to question whether humanity can truly be redeemed? you mean that essay? i need you to understand that i think dishing on children's media is stupid. children, and young girls especially, are constantly derided for what they like. i'm not here to do that. likewise, i'm not here to dish on sequels and reboots. i love sequels and reboots. i even liked the hobbit movies. i have no taste and won't attempt to force my taste on others. no. i'm here to say that spirit untamed is an unmitigated crime against both god and man in every way a piece of media can be because it attempts to build on the unparalleled masterpiece that came before it.

and i know i'm right. i've never been more right. what the fuck is spirit untamed, you ask? here's a trailer. you'll note they turned off comments. every official iteration of this has comments turned off. what i'm about to say in this essay is very much fellow-feeling for people of a certain age and they've made their thoughts explicitly clear basically everywhere this sequel film has been talked about. if you don't want to watch the above trailer or can't, it's a cgi animated horse girl movie with all the horse girl accoutrements. she moves to a small town, she's a little weird, she loves animals, she makes friends. presumably something bad is happening and she will fix it with horses and friendship. once again, i'm not here to dish on that. i love cgi and i'm a horse girl. i learned how to ride on a mustang. this is a movie about me. that's fine. if this were the only spirit that had ever existed, it would be fine.

unfortunately, this is a sequel to a much better movie, 2002's traditionally animated spirit: stallion of the cimmaron. when i say it's a "better movie" i mean that i'm not totally sure two movies so different can exist in the same universe. because the 2002 movie was told from the perspective of the HORSE as voiced by MATT DAMON and it was literally about him SABOTAGING WESTWARD EXPANSION and FUCKING THE EVIL UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT and DESTROYING INDUSTRY.

there are exactly two relevant humans in the film: the colonel (he's a colonel) and little creek (he's a lakota boy who gets captured by the united states government along with spirit, the titular horse). i'll let you guess who the bad guy is! no i won't. it's the united states government which is accurately depicted as an accessory of capitalist expansion west as represented by the railroad specifically, to the detriment of all things good. the first time we see anyone in uniform, they're killing natives in an unproved massacre on a native village. shortly after, the colonel captures spirit, and then little creek after that. when the colonel sees little creek, he comments on his race in a way that is malicious and real, and then has him put not in the stockade but tied up where they tie unbroken horses, where they have tied spirit. the movie never attempts to sidestep what it's depicting or saying. it says it plainly, in a way any child or adult can understand. it's uncompromising.

honestly, i'm kind of shocked this movie hasn't entered into the modern sphere of discourse a little more. maybe it's because it's unimpeachable. no one can disagree that it's visually one of the most beautiful animated movies out there. no one can disagree with the message, because it's so simple and true: yes, the government destroyed native populations. yes, it existed largely as an arm of capitalism to aid westward expansion at the expense of native populations and the land itself. the dichotomy of good and evil is so clear in this one and the evil is american.

this is the climactic scene:

spirit--who has just destroyed the railroad with little creek's help--tries to escape the actual literal united states government who are trying to actually kill this horse and this lakota boy with actual guns. i think little creek actually gets shot, but not fatally. they escape together by jumping across a canyon, solidifying the eagle symbolism that the movie used repeatedly as a metaphor for freedom and the spirit of the west, but the west-west. like the actual land in the west. not whatever texas thinks it is. it ends with little creek letting spirit go (this scene apparently still makes me cry 20 years later so JOT that down) along with his own horse so they can go live in horseful peace in the (titular) cimarron, which in this movie is an effective stand-in for the unmolested west--though the area depicted is largely a fantasy mishmash of various areas.

full stop i'm a emotionally compromised about any discussion of the american west and history. it's been most of my life and the depth and nuance is endless. we could examine the rights and the wrongs of the national park system, of preservation over conservation, over the drastic and continued and literal physical marginalization of native people and cultures. we can also get deep into wild horses in this area specifically today, how they're rounded up, why, and where they ultimately end up. all the efficacy of that. i've been to more bureau of land management auctions than i can count, and even trained a few wild horses. i'm not going to get into any of that here. i just want you to know that this animated horse movie, with music by bryan adams and hans zimmer, is the closest thing we have had to a mainstream kid's movie addressing any of it. any of the reality and any of the history.

it depicts the government sanctioned destruction of native populations, it shows how the "untouched" west was actually very much touched by native populations prior to industrial expansion west but not in a way that destroyed those areas, it critiques the very concept of taming the west, and it shows that manifest destiny and westward expansion as represented in the movie by the railroad had a very real toll on nature in and of itself and required vast fucking resources to accomplish. it even shows that they were really shitty to horses in the old west. and again, not to harp on it, but it absolutely 100% is the only mainstream animated film that shows an unprovoked massacre of a native village by the government. and it did all this no exposition, almost no dialogue at all. it just puts it on screen in stunning animation. i dare any studio to even attempt a movie like this today. no one would even try.

He realized his dogs have an unusual skill. Now he uses them to help save turtles.

By Cathy Free

John Rucker was a high school English teacher in North Carolina when he stumbled upon something interesting: Whenever he took his two dogs hiking, they would run into the tall grass and bring him back box turtles. Like a gift, his Boykin spaniels would gently lay them at his feet, unharmed.

He mentioned it to a few people, and soon, biology teachers from the University of North Carolina started reaching out to him and asking whether he would take their students out so they could put transmitters on the turtles to study them.

Several years later, the outings were so successful, Rucker was fielding calls from wildlife veterinarians and zoologists who were studying turtle populations.

“Because turtles aren’t easily detected in the wild by the human eye, I could see that I was on to something,” said Rucker, now 73.

Now, two decades later, Rucker’s spaniels are a highly in-demand, specialized team trained to sniff out box turtles by following their urine trails.

The dogs — Yogi, Ruger, Jenny Wren, Lazarus, Scamp, Skeeter and Rooster — travel across the country with Rucker helping to track turtle populations and identify threats and diseases.

This isn’t just trolling or sabotage, they quite literally set themselves up for this to happen by allowing all of the free speech.

Now, they have to go through and “censor”, or “cancel”, all of the stuff they don’t like, restricting their precious first amendment and hypocritically banning people for free speech on the platform they guaranteed would promote free speech, until they’re only left with stuff they like and want to hear about.

Also consider: pigeons have some borderline supernatural abilities- they can sense electromagnetic fields, are some of the fastest and most nimble fliers of the birds, and also survive absurd injuries like missing feet, half beaks and broken wings. They live in cities, the most inhospitable ecosystems on earth.

The expelled half-giant. The young werewolf. The repentant Death Eater.

He protects them and gives them a second chance. All he asks in return is their loyalty.

And, if on occasion he requests that they undertake a certain task, invoking their debt of gratitude - well, that is no more than he is owed.

He once thought to add a certain disowned Black to his collection, but quickly realised his mistake.

Sirius is not an outcast, but a rebel. He knowingly chose his path, and chooses what price he is willing to pay for it. He refuses to be used.

Harry was an outcast due to a childhood filled with abuse and neglect. 

Vernon made him an outcast by dismissing his claims of magic, berating him, locking him in a CLOSET and putting bars on his window, and let’s face it, even though her editor made her cut it out, Jo intended for there to be physical abuse. 

Petunia made him an outcast by enabling and contributing to this abuse, as well as making Harry do dozens of chores while doting on Dudley. 

Dudley made him an outcast by bullying him and threatening any students at school who wanted to be his friends. 

And the rest of the wizarding world made him an outcast when they bullied him for being an outsider.

Harry James Potter became an outcast the moment he was placed with The Dursleys.

Think about it What would Harry have been like if he had grown up in the wizarding world? Or, to put it another way, what would Harry have been like if he had grown up in a world where magic was the norm?

He would have taken magic for granted. He would have been less likely (especially as he got older) to view Dumbledore as a wise mentor and more likely to see him as flawed and capable of bad decisions. He would have seen both the world and Dumbledore as ordinary, with their good points and bad points.

But Dumbledore didn’t need a well-adjusted boy who took magic and the magical world for granted. He needed a child who would love the magical world unstintingly, even irrationally, because it was a haven from neglect and abuse. Even more, he needed a child who feared this world becoming evil and who therefore would not question someone that he saw as the ultimate authority, especially if he believed that obeying that authority would keep the world safe.

Even if obedience meant his own death.

Dumbledore wanted a martyr who would die for the wizarding world, because he believed that Voldemort could not die until Harry did. Which was why he left Harry with the Dursleys and let them neglect and emotionally abuse him for the next ten years.