this is not a coherent blog

(original tags: she literally had tears in her eyes while she explained that her pikachu had a boy tail shape. i was like hey she can still be a girl. all we know from her body shape is what her body is shaped like. maybe if we asked her she would say that she feels like she’s really a girl. and my kid was like BUT POKEMON CANT TALK 😭😭😭😭 so i was like ‘ok. pikachu. if you want to use he/him say ‘pika’. if you want to use she/her say ‘chu’. and if you want smth else say ‘pikachu’’. and my daughter had her say ‘chu’ and i was like see there you go! now. she doesn’t HAVE to change her tail shape. she can totally be a girl with a rectangle tail. but if she would feel more comfortable with heart shape bc she prefers it, or so that people won’t assume she’s a boy, i can make that happen. so pikachu what do you think? do you want tail surgery? and pikachu agreed enthusiastically! so. plushie gender-affirming surgery first thing tomorrow i guess!)

Carnivorous plants doin this is so funny to me

Mammal in a Sunday Dress explores the uneasy relationship between femininity, civilisation, and the animal body. At first glance, the figure appears modest and withdrawn. Her posture is composed, her gaze seemingly lowered towards her bare feet, recalling the conventions of nineteenth-century portraiture where women were often depicted as passive objects of observation. Yet as the viewer moves closer, the illusion collapses. Her eyes are not lowered at all. She is looking directly back. The delayed eye contact transforms the encounter. The viewer approaches believing they are safely observing a woman; instead, they realise they have been observed themselves. The work refuses the traditional power dynamic of portraiture, denying the comfort of anonymous spectatorship. Looking becomes a reciprocal act. For Cox, the painting considers humanity's persistent desire to separate itself from the rest of the animal kingdom. The title quietly undermines this distinction. A "mammal" is not another creature—it is us. The Sunday dress, rich with cultural associations of femininity, morality, and respectability, becomes an attempt to distinguish ourselves from nature. Yet clothing cannot alter biology. Beneath lace and ritual remains the same vulnerable animal body. The work also reflects on the historical relationship between women and nature. Across art, religion, and philosophy, women have repeatedly been positioned as closer to instinct, emotion, reproduction, and the body itself, while men have been aligned with reason, culture, and civilisation. Mammal in a Sunday Dress does not reject this comparison. Instead, it questions why proximity to nature has so often been treated as something lesser. Chiaroscuro isolates the figure within darkness, allowing the luminous dress to symbolise the performance of civilisation while the bare feet quietly return the body to the earth. Neither is presented as more truthful than the other. The painting exists in the tension between performance and instinct, refinement and biology. Mammal in a Sunday Dress ultimately asks a simple but unsettling question: if every layer of culture were stripped away, what would remain? Not a king. Not a saint. Not a gentleman or a lady. Only another mammal, looking back.

Idk why but i find this funny even tho i need context

What do they put in water at Cobalt Soul because woah 😳

truly the future is stupider than anyone could have imagined

Alex Ward’s exploration of Occtis is so fresh and fascinating. He specifically said (I forget if this is from a cooldown or other ep) that he wanted to explore the concept of undeath without vampirism. Brennan took that conceptual baseball and knocked it out of the park.

#''i am going to castrate him tonight.'' ''yay!'' *INCREDIBLY CONFUSED.