the sleepy sneeper

oozey mess

shark vs the universe

blake kathryn

JBB: An Artblog!
πͺΌ
$LAYYYTER
ojovivo
Show & Tell
todays bird

Product Placement
Peter Solarz
cherry valley forever

#extradirty

@theartofmadeline
Cosimo Galluzzi
we're not kids anymore.
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her

pixel skylines

Janaina Medeiros
seen from Chile
seen from Saudi Arabia

seen from Germany
seen from Netherlands

seen from United States

seen from TΓΌrkiye

seen from Paraguay
seen from Paraguay

seen from United States
seen from Paraguay
seen from Paraguay

seen from Saudi Arabia

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
@ananeiah
the sleepy sneeper

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch β’ No registration required β’ HD streaming
Joanna with the greatest post-win photo of all time
by glass_museum on tiktok
pdf of the quoted essay by jeremy waldron
Can someone please write out what theyre saying? The closed captions on screen are too short and fast for me :(
I tried my best, here's what she says in the video:
Everbody wants third spaces until a homeless guy shows up. Now theres a lot of talk about third spaces for a reason. We need places to form community beyond just home and work, but that begs the question of who gets to be a part of our communities? You want more parks, more libraries but then you complain when these public infrastructures are, well public.
For the unhoused the importance of public spaces isn't just a matter of wanting somewhere to chill with friends it's a matter of existence and freedom. In his landmark essay "homelessness and the issue of freedom," Jeremy Waldron argues that the freedoms of the poor are dispraportionately restricted under the law since their material conditions coerce them into a state in which they must choose between survival and the violation of the law. He writes that freedom exists for the homeless "only to the extent that our society is communist."
Now before your redscare ass starts to hemmorage over the C-word let me explain, but first let's define our terms. Specifically let's distinguish between postive freedoms and negative freedoms. While postive freedom is the capacity to act according to ones free will, negative freedom is the capacity to act free from the coercion of others.
So things like loitering laws [and] public indecency violations though they apply to the rich and poor alike, they apply disproportionatly to those who posses no private property of their own and thus who exist solely in the collective space, and so while a homeless person may posses the positive freedom to, say, physically lay down in a park, they have their negative freedom restricted since they'll be forcebly removed for doing so, because of the regulations placed on public spaces that prohibit certain actions that are typically relegated to the private, like sleeping, pissing, showering.
All these actions are natural and necessary, and yet theyre prohibited in the public space. And this limitation is no problem for owners of private property, since the public is conceived of as being complementary to the private.
However, as Waldron notes, "This complementarity works only for those who have the benefit of both sorts of places" so if youre homeless you're stuck in a situation where you're forced to violate the law in order to survive, because in order to exist, one needs somewhere they can exist.
There's oftentimes a contradiction with how people consider the homeless if they even consider them at all, people don't want them pissing in the streets, but they also don't want them pissing in the Mcdonald's bathroom. People don't want encampments, but they also oppose the construction of affordable public housing.
There seems to be a desire for increased public life, but only a certain kind of public.
But if you want to advocate for community building then we need to reconsider who gets to be a part of our community.
Martha and Jonathan find a baby in an ark. There is no note with him, but they see how tenderly he was swaddled, how desperately sent here, and they look at each other and they know. She was on the Kindertransport. He lost his parents to the camps. Martha's eyes say "He is like us." Her voice says, "Moses in the bullrushes."
They take him home. They give him the Hebrew name Kal-El and the American name Clark so he will fit in. They know what it is to be different. There is no Hebrew school in Smallville so they teach him at home, and study Torah together. When he shows special abilities, they wonder to each other if he is the Moshiach. Not for the strength of his body, but for the strength of his kindness. He always seems to be helping others, delivering them from harm, as he was delivered to them. They never tell him this, but they teach him about the obligations without measure. He's a natural.
At school, he is side-eyed for being different. When he displays eccentricities, the villagers shrug and say "maybe it's a Jewish thing." The Kents make sure he values his education, and is always home for Shabbas dinner.
His is bar-mitzva'd at the nearest shul, a few towns over. They didn't know his birthday, so they chose one near Parshat Shemot. Now they worry that was too on-the-nose, but he gives a moving d'var about the obligation to speak truth to power.
As he comes into his own and tries to be a hero, he hides his identity from the public, not out of shame, but to keep his adopted parents safe. They've been persecuted enough.
When he moves to the big city for a job at a newspaper, Pa is so proud he cries. Clark uses his journalistic skills to expose corruption, give voice to the neglected and oppressed, and research his own origins. When he learns the truth about Krypton and his birth parents' desperate bid to send him to safety, Ma and Pa are not at all surprised that they were right.
When Clark brings Lois home, he assures his parents she is a nice Jewish girl, but they're just glad she's a mensch. They step on a glass to remember the destruction of Krypton, and stand under a chuppah quilted by Ma.
A white billionaire spews lies about him, trying to spread fear of the stranger in their midst. He comes out in public and says "There's nothing more American than being an immigrant."
When the government turns against immigrants, he stands on the side of the protestors and protects. Tear gass does nothing to him. He makes himself a shield. He writes article after article in the Daily Planet, making sure the public knows what their government is doing, that immigrants know their rights, that the powerful are put on notice. When they start rounding people up, he says "Never again."
He shows up at immigrant detention centers, armed with miracles. And says "Let my people go."
#i'm not crying you are#this hit me right in the feels#weren't many of the og superman creators jewish?
They were! Superman was created in 1938 by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, two Jewish boys, sons of immigrants.
also thank you!
tummy

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch β’ No registration required β’ HD streaming
investigation
thankfully, since taskmaster has incredibly high rewatch value. for Reasons*, when i am unable to watch series 22, i will be able to watch one of the truly incredible previous 21. not to sound like a pretentious formal announcement, but i look forward to watching clips of chloe and isy and nina separately from the actual episodes, since i doubt i'll be watching those
*Reasons being primarily Matt Lucas and Richard Ayoade not far behind.
May we all know decadence such as this
puppy

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch β’ No registration required β’ HD streaming
why arent corals kosher
I refuse to believe that Halakha recognizes coral as a fish and not at most a plant
let me get this straight, you want to try to eat it???
all Iβm saying that if I did, Hashem wouldnβt stop me
i mean ΧΧΧ¨Χ Χ©ΧΧΧ Χ¨ΧΧ¦Χ ΧΧΧΧͺ and all that, but someone should stop you
If it isn't edible, it doesn't need to be kosher. If you want to eat a rock, you don't have to worry about it being kosher. You still shouldn't eat rocks
its not an avera , but it is still a really dumb idea
you can even argue that being dumb and eating rocks is an aveira. But it's a different aveira
I need goyim to understand that this is literally what passages of Talmud look like.
I have questions about whether weβre eating live coral, like a parrotfish swimming around biting chunks off the reef. If weβre doing that, coral shouldnβt be kosher because the little coral animals lack fins and scales. If weβre eating the calcium carbonate deposits the corals have left behind after dying and decomposing, thatβs an entirely different question.
Depending on the size and amount of coral you eat, eating coral wouldnβt be bad for you. Are you swallowing large enough chunks to cause intestinal blockages? or grinding it up and using it as an additive? People use coral as a source of calcium in vitamins.
But given that corals globally are in danger due to warming oceans, please donβt eat coral.
I do t think live coral needs fins and scales to be kosher for the same reason that seaweed doesnβt need fins and scales to be kosher
I would argue that halachically, corals should count as shellfish. In that they live in the water but have no bones, but possibly a calcium carbonate βshellβ that the soft coral animal retreats into. Even fleshy soft corals such as Xenia and the various leather corals found in the red and Mediterranean seas would likely more closely resemble slugs or clams if not considered algae.
Not to mention many species of soft or large polyp stony corals (much more edible upon initial impression, compared to small polyp stony corals) are toxic. Dying of Palythoa toxicity is NOT kosher.
Also if one where to break a piece of coral off of the main body and eat it wouldn't that violate the Miztvah the forbids from eating a part of an animal while the animal still lives?
I would argue is does.
Breaking a piece of coral off to eat it would not violate the commandment to not eat a part of a still-living animal because the coral in a colony, not a single being. It would be like eating a handful of bees out of a hive, which, while treif and also inadvisable, would not be a violation the way that eating the claw of a Florida stone crab would.
As for why someone would eat the calcium carbonate deposits left behind by dead coral, Iβd have to assume that weβd be talking about someone who is doing so for some sort of mystical or pseudoscientific reason, as I can think of few culinary or nutritional uses for calcium carbonate to begin with, and none at all that you couldnβt better source from other places. If the reasoning is anything to do with spirits and crystals and energy resonances, then it may be an avera on additional grounds, by virtue of maybe being some form of avodah zara.
Calcium carbonate is the same stuff as Tums, so theoretically eating dead coral could help with heartburn, but in most cases it would just be easier to find and acquire tums. That being said I would not oversimplify the diversity of the human experience to the point that I would assume an underwater heartburn emergency could never occur. It would be contrived af though.
Hmm. I suppose if people were consuming it medicinally, then it would be equivalent to the Bekhorot 7b ruling on the medicinal consumption of donkey urine (and therefore treif, but not completely ill-advised)
Oh, also good for osteoporosis, I suppose!
But yeah, it all goes back to "seems easier to just use regular ol' marble dust.
...related important question: are we sure that coral is considered alive, and an animal of any kind, like, halakhically speaking?
I mean:
Coral doesn't bleed (which is the important part about eating a still living animal)
They don't have lungs or gills
They generally don't move? (I guess corallimorphs can...kinda crawl? But otherwise no they don't move).
How is coral really different from like, fungi above water? Sure it can be a collective mass (mushrooms and their mycellium colonies!), but it's not capable of bleeding, and it doesn't have lungs or gills, and it doesn't really move. It just kinda...spreads.
I'm just saying we have to establish that coral is significantly different from like, a portobello mushroom. Fungi are kosher but aren't technically plants.
No because fungi are bottom feeders of the ground and yet mushrooms are kosher.
The issue is whether or not these are creatures according to Torah. From Leviticus 11:
These you may eat of all that live in water: anything in water, whether in the seas or in the streams, that has fins and scalesβthese you may eat.
But anything in the seas or in the streams that has no fins and scales, among all the swarming things of the water and among all the other living creatures that are in the waterβthey are an abomination for you
and an abomination for you they shall remain: you shall not eat of their flesh and you shall abominate their carcasses.
Everything in water that has no fins and scales shall be an abomination for you.
Now, I am going to reference Bible hub here mostly because they have a nice Strong's Hebrew concordance feature that sefaria doesn't have that is easy to copy and paste from.
But basically I would argue that the important words we have to distinguish here are:
the teeming
Χ©ΧΦΆΦ£Χ¨ΦΆΧ₯ (Ε‘eΒ·reαΉ£)
Noun - masculine singular construct
Strong's 8318: A swarm, active mass of minute animals
life
ΧΦ·ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΦΧ (haΒ·αΈ₯ayΒ·yΔh)
Article | Adjective - feminine singular
Strong's 2416: Alive, raw, fresh, strong, life
and creatures
Χ ΦΆΦ₯Χ€ΦΆΧ©Χ (neΒ·pΜeΕ‘)
Noun - feminine singular
Strong's 5315: A soul, living being, life, self, person, desire, passion, appetite, emotion
So. Is coral an active (teeming) mass of minute animals? Well. It is a living colony in the same way that mushrooms are colonies of living things. But other things that swarm or teem are like... krill. shrimp. Locusts. Flies. Ants.
Y'know, stuff that moves. Swarms. Coral doesn't teem or swarm. It's static.
Which leaves us with living and creatures.
I would argue again that "living" implies regular movement β for example, you can have living waters. (Same root word for mayyim chayyim).
But also the other terms which appear beside the root word for life/living over and over again are basically:
Creeping, moving (Strong's 7430 Χ¨ΦΈΧΦ·Χ©Χ ramas)
Flesh (Strong's 1320 ΧΦΈΦΌΧ©ΦΈΧΧ¨ basar)
Flying or soaring (5774 Χ’ΧΦΌΧ£)
Having a soul (or literal breath) (5315, Χ ΦΆΧ€ΦΆΧ©Χ)
And nefesh is of course, also the last one in that list!
So is coral alive in the way Torah usually means things are living beings? Well, coral doesn't creep or move. It also doesn't have blood (which, arguably, means it can't have a carcass. It sort of has bones! But no carcass). It...MIGHT have flesh? I'm sort of unclear about this.
It can't fly or soar.
Which leaves us with:
Do corals have flesh? and,
do corals have souls? And if not metaphorically souls, do they have breath?
Well, coral do respirate. But so do plants. And neither of them have lungs. Also according to @montereybayaquarium's website coral get oxygen from algae? (Don't worry Monterey bay aquarium no one is actually going to eat the coral, this is all hypothetical)
Coral reefs get their bright colors from the algae β called zooxanthellae β living in their tissues. The zooanthellae provide the coral polyps with oxygen and nutrients produced from photosynthesis. In return, the coral polyps provide zooanthellae with carbon dioxide (a byproduct of the polypsβ βbreathingβ oxygen) and shelter.
Coral polyps can have mouths, but they don't really breathe with lungs. So I'm not sure they have that kind of nefesh (breath of life). And corals are like, a bunch of skeletal base material with living polyps on the top. But are they fleshy? But all their color comes from the algae living in them.
For this I go back to the presence of blood being a big factor, because again, mushrooms have flesh but don't have blood, and so halakhically...that fungi is a plant.
Also apparently Octocorals don't have those exoskeletons? So at that point how would we know something is an octocoral versus like...a seaweed?
I think either seaweed isn't meant to be kosher, or actually corals are kosher because seaweed is. Oysters have gills and hearts. Scallops have a gajillion eyes. Really easy to see those aren't plants.
Basically if you look at a coral does it have a breath and soul, does it fly or creep, does it bleed, does it have flesh, does it move around in general? Could it possibly be a plant, halakhically speaking? (Not by scientific taxonomy!) Would bronze age folks look at it and go "yeah, that's a plant."? Also important: what IS a plant? Halakhically?
Many such questions. Anyways I don't think corals have souls.
So... The Gemara does seem to view coral as a tree, or at least it discusses coral as producing wood in Rosh Hashanah 23a. OP appears to be in the right that it's halachically a plant!
Greg and Alex in Taskmaster Series 21
TASKMASTER EPISODE TITLES β Series 21
personally I am of the opinion that vegans who are like βthe way our food system currently works under capitalism on a large scale is exceptionally cruel to all animals including humans and is not sustainable, so Iβm doing what I can to make the most ethical choices available to me about what I eat and encourage others to do the sameβ are generally very reasonable people who I agree with in spades. but vegans who seem to think human beings are not themselves animals who are ultimately also part of the food chain but instead some kind of other paternalistic higher entity that can never engage in ethical and sustainable hunting practices (and especially the fringe Iβve seen who think other carnivorous animal predators are also evil and need to be eliminated) are people I regard as foolish at best if not actively anti-indigenous and racist
this is true

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch β’ No registration required β’ HD streaming
female-presenting vitruvian
i appreciate the amount of people reblogging this despite me not really tagging this at all. im glad many of people feel the same anger i do.
Victo Ngai (Hong Kong/American, b.1988), The Day, 2012