I Have No Garf and I Must Field
Interview Vampire Daily
hello vonnie

izzy's playlists!
Cookie Run:Kingdom Official!
Fai_Ryy

Discoholic 🪩


@theartofmadeline
Cosimo Galluzzi

Andulka
The Bowery Presents
occasionally subtle
Color Me Curious

titsay
$LAYYYTER
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
🪼
EXPECTATIONS
seen from Kyrgyzstan

seen from Türkiye

seen from Malaysia

seen from Bosnia & Herzegovina

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from Poland
seen from Canada

seen from Türkiye
seen from Brazil
seen from India
seen from France

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Bangladesh
seen from Germany

seen from Canada
@andonlyafoolwouldsaythat
I Have No Garf and I Must Field

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 • No registration required • HD streaming
I have a new favourite batshit rail idea
Please build it for the funny please please please
You're right. I SHOULD be able to take the train from Minneapolis to Berlin.
"Using an Oxford comma is a sign of AI"
bestie boo, let me fill you in on something: if you're going to take any part of 'good grammar' and randomly assign it to She's A Witch! AI, you might as well give up. It's over. You're cooked. Anyone who has spent the last decade or more learning to type properly, anyone who has spent any time writing articles/papers/essays that require you to use 'good grammar' is going to fall into that 'oh no it might be AI' trap.
Stop hunting like it's 1692. You're not going to find Goody Proctor at the ChatGPT sacrament. What you're going to do is exactly what happened back then: harming people who've done nothing wrong.
can I reblog this a million times
Y'all.
I did some digging.
The word that led to all this was "scry".
Shit be wildin on threads this week
You should also be able to figure out what a text is saying without understanding every word. 90% of the time you'll do just fine even if a word is unfamiliar. You should be able to understand the meaning of a word through context, or at least the meaning of the sentence or paragraph. There are some rare instances where the specific word is crucial, but most of the time it's not necessary to understand the text.
This is a skill you are taught in foreign language classes btw. When you get to a certain level, they give you texts with words you probably don't know yet, and you have to summarise the text without looking any of them up. It really helps with your literacy skills. I can really recommend picking up some books with unfamiliar vocabulary and trying to understand it without looking up words
@unashamedly-enthusiastic
your tags are very correct and also read like poetry to me
After school care pulled me aside about my child dropping an f-bomb “without remorse” and I put on my concerned face and nodded a bunch.
Apparently he was building something with a younger kid “who really looks up to him and is just starting to make friends” and said “Hey, you’re really fucking good at this.” which is, in my estimation, really a parenting victory.
I absolutely failed at doing this:

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 • No registration required • HD streaming
settings > wound > my wound > reopen
do not forget this
I learned about the murder of Kitty Genovese in two separate psychology classes, at two separate universities. It was studied as an example of the “bystander effect”, which is a phenomenon that occurs when witnesses do not offer help to a victim when there are other people present.
I was told by my professors that Kitty Genovese was a 28-year-old unmarried woman who was attacked, raped, and brutally murdered on her way home from her shift as manager of a bar. I was told that numerous people witnessed the attack and her cries for help but didn’t do anything because they “assumed someone else would”. Nobody intervened until it was too late.
What I was not told was that Kitty Genovese was a lesbian who lived more or less openly with her partner in the Upper West Side and managed a gay bar.
Now… is it likely that people overheard Kitty’s cries for help and ignored them because they thought someone else would deal with it? Or, perhaps, did they ignore her because they knew she was a lesbian and just didn’t care?
Maybe that’s not the case. Maybe it was just a random attack. Maybe her neighbours didn’t know she was gay, or didn’t care.
But it’s a huge chunk of information to leave out about her in a supposedly scientific study of events, since her sexuality made her much more vulnerable to violent crimes than the average person. And it’s a dishonour to her memory.
RIP Kitty Genovese. Society may only remember you for how you died, but I will remember you for who who were.
this was one of the first lessons I had in psych too and we were never told about this either nor was it in any of the reading materials
I never knew this.
I also never knew this about Kitty Genovese, but I do know that, in fact, many of the dozen (not thirty-eight) people who witnessed some part of the attack (which took place after 3AM, on a chilly night in March when most people’s windows were closed) tried to help in some way.
One shouted out his window for the attacker to leave her alone, which did successfully scare the man off temporarily.
Another called the police but, seeing her still on her feet, said only that there had been a fight but the woman seemed to be okay.
And when Kitty Genovese was finally attacked in a vestibule where she couldn’t be seen from outside, Karl Ross, a neighbor, saw what was happening but was too frightened himself to go to her rescue–so he started calling other neighbors to ask what he should do. Eventually one of them told him to call the police, which he did, and the woman he called, Sophie Farrar, rushed out to help Kitty even though she didn’t know whether the attacker was gone.
Kitty Genovese died in the arms of a neighbor who tired to help and comfort her while they waited for the police and ambulance to arrive. Kitty was in fact still alive, although mortally wounded, when the ambulance reached the scene.
The man who saw the final stabbing? Who panicked and called other neighbors first instead of the police? The man who said, infamously, that he “didn’t want to get involved” because he was reluctant to turn to the police for help? He was thought to be gay himself. He was a friend of Kitty and Mary Ann’s. After being interviewed by the police he took a bottle of vodka to Mary Ann and sat with her, trying to comfort her.
So, no. I don’t think the evidence indicates that Kitty Genovese’s neighbors let her die because she was a lesbian, because Kitty Genovese’s neighbors tried to help.
See also: Debunking the Myth of Kitty Genovese (The New York Post)
A Call for Help (The New Yorker)
(Also, going by the content of the murderer’s confession, it was indeed a random attack.)
how on EARTH was this “scientifically” studied but the details gotten so wrong and the wrong as hell conclusion published and taught in schools?!?!?! where were those scientists observation skills?! on vacation?!
How to take facts and turn them into an urban legend that gets taught in schools: Make a bad made-for-t.v.-movie about it, watch it, believe everything the movie says, annnnnnnd go! That’s how it gets taught as this supposed “scientific study.” Someone got fucking lazy.
Spread the real deal, kids.
A book about this, “No One Helped”: Kitty Genovese, New York City, and the Myth of Urban Apathy, won the Lambda Literary Award for LGBT Nonfiction this year! if anyone wants to check it out try your local library!
I want to add one crucial but telling detail: the story about the 38 witnesses didn’t come out of nowhere, it was handed to the New York Times City Editor by the Police Commissioner in order to distract said editor from asking unwelcome questions about a different case, and the story that was eventually written and which made headlines was almost entirely composed from police sources.
At the time, the NYPD was coming under quite a bit of criticism about rising crime rates and the seeming ineffectiveness of the police’s response to the problem. In the Kitty Genovese case, even though people did in fact call the police, it took about an hour for them to show up and the first detectives didn’t arrive until three hours later (at which point they mostly spent their time interrogating Kitty’s girlfriend about their relationship, because for “some reason” they considered her to be the most likely suspect for the murder. In fact, the police wouldn’t catch the actual killer until six days later when he was picked up for having a stolen TV in the trunk of his car, at which point he admitted to having committed a total of three murders). It’s not an accident that one of the things to come out of the Genovese case was the establishment of the 9-1-1 system, because at the time that the attack happened, you had to call the specific number of a particular police precinct and it was up to the duty sergeant on the desk to take action - which was usually to send someone out from the precinct to the address reported, because cops on foot patrol wouldn’t be outfitted with two-way radios for several years. It’s more than a little convenient that at a time when the NYPD is coming in for public scrutiny about its ability to do the basic job of responding to reports of crimes in a timely fashion, the Police Commissioner happens to hand the City Editor of the city’s most prominent newspaper a story which puts the blame for the slow response on the apathy and inaction of New Yorkers, neatly absolving the NYPD for its ridiculously poor performance in this case in particular and its response to the rise in crime in general.
It’s also quite telling that the New York Times ran with the story the way they did. It’s not like there weren’t people on the scene who said they had called the police, or that the basic facts about how many witnesses there were and what they had seen didn’t match the account that the commissioner had given. The writer the Times sent out chose not to include this information because “it would have ruined the story.“ The Times wanted to frame the story as a narrative about how the root of NYC’s problems was urban apathy and anomie - and the news organizations that picked up on the Times’ reporting and made the Kitty Genovese case a national and global story wanted to frame the story as proof that NYC was a dangerous urban jungle that deserved its decline because of the bad character of its residents. I think the takeaway from this case isn’t just about sloppy scientific research, it’s that you have to always consider how official narratives are used to assign blame to specific individuals and groups and absolve larger institutions of responsibility.
Obsessed with the comments on this video
extremely underrated subgenre of tumblr post: when someone makes a general statement about something, and another person offers a counter-statement that's just completely nonsensical, and the OP just agrees instantly even if it makes no sense at all
examples:
my eyes roll all the way to the back of my head whenever i see people saying things like "btvs isn't good exactly but it is iconic 90s television." it's okay to admit you like something without adding a million qualifiers to protect your ego. buffy is a good show. it wouldn't be so iconic and influential and beloved if it weren't good. it's got plenty of flaws, obviously, and the showrunner was not a good person. but i feel like some people need tv shows to be glossy ass golden age of television ten hour movies about brooding white guys before they feel comfortable expressing genuine appreciation for them. or alternatively, they need to prove that they're not morally deficient for liking something that they have criticisms of. and that's a fucking skill issue, not a reflection of the show's quality. btvs is a good show with good characters and good writing and compelling themes. if it didn't have all those things going for it, people wouldn't still be so passionate about it 30 years after the fact.

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 • No registration required • HD streaming
He HUNGERS
you fucking idiot. you misread a social encounter. we're gonna fucking kill you
This is why you see so many many many "we can't vote our way out of this" posts online. They know that sentiment will depress turnout. Turnout that will get the people paying them kicked out of power.
Vote
Jami Ul Alfar Mosque, the Red Mosque in Sri Lanka
Could Magister Maxwell Tennyson solve the Kira murders?
Could catch Kira, would survive
Could not catch Kira, would survive
Could catch Kira, would not survive
Could not catch Kira, would not survive

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 • No registration required • HD streaming
Something just occurred to me in the category of "experiences I feel are universal but are probably not." So here's a poll!
Have you ever been tent camping?
Yes, but not since I was a child
Yes, I have camped in a tent as an adult (possibly also as a child)
No, I have never gone camping in a tent.
We're including any kind of tent, but not RVs, campers, or cabins. Open-air camping (with no tent) or with tarp tents counts as tent camping for purposes of this question.
died and lost all my items in a cave: but don't worry. if i simply run back into the cave with zero (0) items. i will surely do better this time. this has never gone wrong for anybody.