"Lady Midnight"
From the Winternight series by Katherine Arden <3
Step-by-step tutorial for this piece, plus many others, is available on my Patreon!
Print Store
Sade Olutola
One Nice Bug Per Day

Sweet Seals For You, Always

Kiana Khansmith
Cosimo Galluzzi

⣠Chile in a Photography âŁ
TMBGareOK. The Official They Might Be Giants tumblr


shark vs the universe
Today's Document

Jar Jar Binks Fan Club

ellievsbear
The Stonewall Inn
Noah Kahan

PR's Tumblrdome
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her

Discoholic đŞŠ
Aqua Utopiaď˝ćľˇăŽĺşă§č¨ćśăç´Ąă
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Venezuela

seen from France

seen from Australia

seen from Brazil

seen from Ireland
seen from Germany
seen from Indonesia

seen from Australia
seen from United Kingdom

seen from Canada

seen from Malaysia
seen from United Kingdom

seen from Australia

seen from United Arab Emirates
seen from Spain

seen from Brazil

seen from United States
@happywhenshereads
"Lady Midnight"
From the Winternight series by Katherine Arden <3
Step-by-step tutorial for this piece, plus many others, is available on my Patreon!
Print Store

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
Reylo - Year of Snake
12 January 1907, Aleksandr Blok (1880-1921), Selected Poems
I donât think Iâve seen an answer to the question of how close or far apart the things happening today (âsend her backâ, detention centers etc) are to the nazis quite as good or thorough as this answer on quora
Iâm just gonna paste it here in full:
When you watch a stadium filled with white people chanting âsend her backâ about a U.S. Congresswomen and our President silently endorses it, what comes up for you?
Mike Jones answered:
Honestly? This.
This photo was taken sometime between May and December 1944. These people are enjoying a bit of âdown timeâ before going back to work. At Auschwitz.
Not because I think what weâre doing is like what the Nazis were doing in 1944, but because this looks so normal. These people didnât think of themselves as âevil,â any more than the people chanting at the Trump rally do.
Hereâs the point: the Holocaust didnât drop out of a clear blue sky in 1941. The concentration camps had been operating since 1933.
The first people sent to the camps werenât Jews at all. It was socialists, communists (remember that if you run across someone who tries to claim the Nazis were actually socialists), Jehovahâs Witnesses (because their faith prevented them from swearing allegiance to the Reich or serving in the military), homosexuals, and other people considered âsocially deviant.â The camps werenât awful places in 1933. Guards who abused prisoners were disciplined and sometimes prosecuted.
By 1935, this changed. As Hitler consolidated power, he pardoned the guards who had been convicted for abusing prisoners and made it clear that that behavior was now acceptable. Jews were now sent to the camps, starting with ones who had come to âcivilizedâ Germany as refugees from pogroms in Eastern Europe. They were described as âinvaders,â accused of spreading disease and stealing jobs from Germans. I understand if that last sentence sent a bit of a chill down your spine.
There were dozens, probably hundreds of concentration camps in operation by 1937. Many prisoners died there from abuse or simply from being worked to death, but they still werenât places people were specifically sent to die; it was just that no one cared whether they died or not.
By 1939, mass killings of Jews had started. Not in the camps; the Nazis werenât bothering to round people up and transport them just to kill them. They would typically be rounded up by the Nazi army and shot en masse and buried in mass graves.
Mass killings of civilians proved to be bad for morale even for Nazi soldiers, which led to the Final Solution. Eight extermination camps were built and went into operation by 1941. None were in Germany proper, so the scale of what was happening could be more easily kept from the German people. Six were in Poland, one in Serbia, and one in Belarus. Some (like Birkenau, sometimes called Auschwitz II) were on the same site as concentration camps (Auschwitz), and some (like Treblinka) were completely separate. Most were in Poland because that was where the largest number of Jews in Europe lived.
These women worked as typists, telegraph clerks, and secretaries in Auschwitz, and were called Helferinnen, which means âhelpers. Their racial purity had been establishedâshould an officer be looking for a girlfriend or a wife, the Helferinnenwere intended to be a resource.â
The point of these photos is that the Nazis were not all Eichmann and Mengele. Their horror was possible because of the many, many people who went along with what they were doing or at least were willing to look the other way. And it didnât start with Chelmno and Sobibor. It started with people being willing to vote for Nazis out of fear of the communists and responding to their appeals to âtrue Germans.â
This photo shows people reading the Nazi newspaper Der StĹąrmer (The Attacker) in 1935. The sign above it reads âThe Jews Are Our Misfortuneâ.
How far, really, are people who would chant âsend her backâ about an American citizen at a political rally from the people calmly reading that newspaper? Remember, that was still four years before the war, six before the extermination camps. It was when the groundwork for those things was being laid.
Letâs talk about our camps for a moment. Pro Publica recently published a long story about someone who works for the Border Patrol and spent time working at one of the camps. Here are a couple of excerpts:
The Border Patrol agent, a veteran with 13 years on the job, had been assigned to the agencyâs detention center in McAllen, Texas, for close to a month when the team of court-appointed lawyers and doctors showed up one day at the end of June.
Taking in the squalor, the stench of unwashed bodies, and the poor health and vacant eyes of the hundreds of children held there, the group members appeared stunned.
Then, their outrage rolled through the facility like a thunderstorm. One lawyer emerged from a conference room clutching her cellphone to her ear, her voice trembling with urgency and frustration. âThereâs a crisis down here,â the agent recalled her shouting.
At that moment, the agent, a father of a 2-year-old, realized that something in him had shifted during his weeks in the McAllen center. âI donât know why sheâs shouting,â he remembered thinking. âNo one on the other end of the line cares. If they did, this wouldnât be happening.â
No one on the other end cares. If they did, this wouldnât be happening. Let that sink in for a moment.
The CBP agent in the story is in his late 30s, a husband and father who served overseas in the military before joining CPB.
Itâs kind of like torture in the army. It starts out with just sleep deprivation, then the next guys come in and sleep deprivation is normal, so they ramp it up. Then the next guys ramp it up some more, and then the next guys, until you have full blown torture going on. That becomes the new normal.
This is how it happens. Step by step, we become the monsters. Look around the country. Try to remember how things were in 2012 or so. How many things that are simply accepted now, often with a âwhat can we do about it?â shrug, would have seemed possible then?
Referring back to the grim conditions inside the Border Patrol holding centers, he said: âSomewhere down the line people just accepted whatâs going on as normal. That includes the people responsible for fixing the problems.â
âWhat happened to me in Texas is that I realized I had walled off my emotions so I could do my job without getting hurt,â he said. âIâd see kids crying because they want to see their dads, and I couldnât console them because I had 500 to 600 other kids to watch over and make sure theyâre not getting in trouble. All I could do was make sure theyâre physically OK. I couldnât let them see their fathers because that was against the rules.
âI might not like the rules,â he added. âI might think that what weâre doing wasnât the correct way to hold children. But what was I going to do? Walk away? What difference would that make to anyoneâs life but mine?â
When asked whether he simply stopped caring, he said: âExactly, to a point thatâs kind of dangerous. But once you do, you feel better.â
This man is a father. He watches hundreds of kids. He had to stop caring on order to do his job.
Letâs say that again: he had to stop caring in order to do his job.
Just like, I imagine, the Helferinnen had to stop caring. To look the other way. To learn helplessness against the system.
I know, there are a thousand reasons why we canât change this. They broke the laws. The President says so. What will we do with all of them if we donât do this? It will encourage others if we donât do this.
Know this: those are all justifying inhuman behavior. Iâm not saying the people running the camps or the people in the government are Nazis; every historical moment is different. But theyâre using many of the same tools the Nazis used. And the same tools are being used against the Uighur in China. And the Rohingya in Myanmar.
Andrea Pitzer is a journalist who has written extensively about the history of concentration camps. Hereâs what she had to say on Twitter this morning:
When I went into the Rohingya camps in Myanmar in 2015, I also talked to people in town who were happy their former neighbors were in camps. Insisting they werenât racist or bigots, many said all they really wanted was for the government to deport the Rohingya to another country.
They claimed the Rohingya were illegal immigrants, rapists, and terrorists. If I mentioned a Rohingya they actually knew, they would sometimes acknowledge maybe *that* Rohingya person wasnât a criminal. They often argued that the Rohingya should be deported as a group anyway.
It was heartbreaking. I was there just after Trump had declared his candidacy in the US, and it was the same rhetoric, almost word for word. A little over a year later in Myanmar, the military drove hundreds of thousands of Rohingya over the border amid terrible atrocities.
Send her back. Send them back. Weâre really not racists. Jews will not replace us.
Do you honestly believe it canât happen here?
Where's the spirit essay jojo
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.
NATURALLY, THIS GIVEN, I WOULD FEEL SOME RESERVATIONS ABOUT A CUTESY SEQUEL WHERE SPIRIT IS LITERALLY TAMED BY THE DAUGHTER OF THE RAILROAD OWNER.

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
Where's the spirit essay jojo
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 cimarron. 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 unprovoked 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.
NATURALLY, THIS GIVEN, I WOULD FEEL SOME RESERVATIONS ABOUT A CUTESY SEQUEL WHERE SPIRIT IS LITERALLY TAMED BY THE DAUGHTER OF THE RAILROAD OWNER.
I simply cannot feel sorry for multi-millionaire Scarlett Johansson only earning $20 million instead of $30 million or what the fuck ever because Disney recognised that large parts of the world still can't safely go to the cinema on account of the deadly pandemic and released Black Widow on Disney+ at the same time as in theatres. But then I also support anyone suing Disney for any reason, so you see my dilemma
The case isnât really about Scarlett Johansson. Itâs about setting precedent for the way actors are paid when content is released on screening services going forward, and Scarlett Johansson is pretty unique in her position of both having a valid case for breach of contract and having a large enough platform, following and wealth that suing Disney wonât completely destroy her and her career.
She offered to renegotiate her contract at the point the decision to release on Disney+ was made, and Disney refused, that is what lead to the case.
The overwhelming majority of actors, even actorâs working for Disney are not millionaires, I know that because I am a jobbing actor, and I earn less in a year then either of my siblings, both of whom have office jobs.
When you get a film or television job, in addition to what youâre paid at the time you also get something that in the UK is called royalty fees, and in the US is called residuals. This occurs when the show or film is shown or licensed on another channel or network, almost always for a set period of time, although Netflix has started buying the rights to small indie films outright.
Royalty checks can be hilariously small. A friend I trained with once got one for ÂŁ2.07 because their show had just been licensed to be shown on a Thai TV network, but more often they are a lifeline for actors. Most actors work minimum wage jobs in between acting gigs, and when you also have the cost of Headshots, Self Tape equipment, travel to auditions and lost wages whenever you have to take time off to prep and travel to auditions, you understand why equity wages are so high for individual jobs, because that one episode in a soap you got paid ÂŁ800-ÂŁ1200 for (minus 10-20% for your agent), could be your wage for 2 months and you would be considered a fairly successful working actor, even if it was your only acting job in that time period.
The case isnât about a multimillionaire quibbling over how many millions she is being paid, although itâs likely that had Black Widow had a prepandemic release Scarlett Johansson would have been paid closer to 200 million than the 20 million she is being paid. Although Disney is pushing that angle hard so I fully understand why youâve fallen into their propaganda trap. It is one of the very few opportunities for actors, screenwriters, cinematographers, directors, and all the other hundreds of creatives involved in the filmmaking process to challenge some of the status quo with streaming services and really ask questions about how royalties will work in the future.
There is a reason that the unions are backing the case and thatâs because the other way around, breach of contract is a huge deal, there can be penalties of hundreds of thousands of dollars for contract breaches, often on jobs where you are paid a fraction of that, and believe me, Netflix, Disney, Amazon, Universal all persue those payments, and in certain circumstances even go out of their way to blacklist the artist.
If breach of contract is a big deal when actors and other creatives do it, it should be just as big a deal when studios do it, but it isnât because Capitalism is rarely about rewarding artists and all about bottom line profit.
This case has the potential to really change things and help millions of ordinary, jobbing actors and creatives. I am 100% on Scarlett Johanssonâs side with this and any reasonable person who cares about the well-being of artists should be too.
^^^^^^^^ this. this right here
she has the money for lawyers, let her set the precedent for those who donât
You know how an elderly lady got third degree burns to a horrifying percentage of her body because MacDonald's was serving coffee at next-to-boiling temperatures and the lid came off her cup and spilled all over her, and she wanted MacDonald's to pay for her medical fees which to her were astronomical but to a mega corp like MacDonald's was a raindrop in the ocean, and instead of just paying the med bills for this woman they went out of their way to deride her and besmirch her and turn the story into "hur dur dumb American didnt know that hot beverages are hot," and thats the version of events everyone remembers, having been successfully distracted from the truth of the matter by a targetted, vicious, loud propaganda campaign by MacDonald's?
Well that's exactly what disney is doing with this "ScarJo is being horribly insensitive about the global pandemic we're in" and their "we were merely being socially conscientious and kind to let people stream our new movies instead of having to go to the cinemas for them" campaign.
This suit isn't actually about ScarJo. Quite aside from the fact that it IS a breach of contract to do a dual release and not hand over any of the profits from the streaming release (which she is absolutely entitled to), its actually about every single actor and writer and voice actor and etc that has similar contracts with all production companies, most of whom do not have the resources that ScarJo has.
Disney knows that if ScarJo wins this, they will be forced to equitably distribute income from their streaming service to those who have the right to such things. They do not want that.
They want you to pay your monthly subscription and your $36 early access fee, and they want to pocket all of that money, even though a portion of it should be going to the actors and creators of the film.
They know that if ScarJo wins, they will not be able to hoard as luck money. So they are running a discredit campaign.
"Oh look how heartless ScarJo is, for wanting MORE money even tho she already got $20m, and EVEN THOUGH we're in a PANDEMIC and there are people DYING. Its so HEARTLESS of her."
And guess what!! Its working!!!!!! People already aren't huge fans of ScarJo, for a range of reasons, but mostly, people are falling prey to the propaganda campaign.
Don't do that. Don't be the person who thinks an old woman who wants her crazy high medical bills paid because she was handed a poorly secured cup of boiling water is actually just a money grabbing idiot. Don't be the person who spreads Disney's "we're the good guys in this actually" bullshit. Don't fall for it.
This whole thing is SO much bigger than ScarJo.
"stop post+ from happening fill out this survey sign this petition do a log out protest" listen ive been here since 2011 that's not how anything on this website works. whether or not you do these things post+ will stay, make little to no money for the website bc nobody uses it except self-important funnyman bloggers and instagram influencer wannabees, and slowly degrade as lack of maintinence from an underpaid staff brings it to complete obsolescence. Let nature run her course đ
EMMA (2009) ⢠EMMA. (2020)

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
Rami Al Ali Fall 2021 Haute Couture Collection
Day Court
Having rewatched Pirates of the Carribean several times, I have noticed something interesting. Will Turner is often the only survivor of massive shipwrecks, like the one that killed his mother or the one with the kraken. Other times even when hes alone he survives drowning in ways he really has no right to, like the destruction of the Interceptor. He just often conveniently finds a perfect sized piece of driftwood or something. Remember what Calypso said? About him having a âtouch of destiny?â I think that the sea could never kill him, will always cradle him and protect him, because all along he was destined to be the captain of the Flying Dutchman. The sea could no more kill him than a human could cut off their own arm.
They literally work every day with very ill cancer-stricken kids who can't get the vaccine.
This makes 100% sense.
If youâre an employee of a world renowned hospital and are anti-vax, you didnât deserve to be hired to begin with because that hospital tends to hire people who understand evidence-based medicine and apply that to clinical practice. If youâre an anti-vax healthcare worker, you arenât practicing evidence-based medicine and are therefore a danger to patients.
the take that âenemies to lovers doesnât have to involve violence!!!â is so boring. knives to the throat or donât bother
Forever obsessed with the fact that even the in-universe annotation in the appendices talking about how Legolas brought Gimli along to Valinor with him is like âWe donât actually know how they managed this. By all accounts, it doesnât make any senseâ
Gimli: So you know Iâm on board with this, obviously, but like. If the world is flat for you, and itâs NOT flat for me, and the boat is only supposed to be able to get there the flat wayâŚ
Legolas: ?
Gimli: What happens if weâre both on the boat?
Legolas: I donât know, but weâre gonna find out
[Insert title card reading MYTHBUSTERS: ARDA EDITION]
For reference:
Appendix A:
âGimli Gloinâs son is renowned, for he was one of the Nine Walkers that set out with the Ring; and he remained in the company of King Elessar throughout the War. He was named Elf-friend because of the great love that grew between him and Legolas, son of King Thranduil, and because of his reverence for the Lady Galadriel.
After the fall of Sauron, Gimli brought south a part of the Dwarf-folk of Erebor, and he became Lord of the Glittering Caves. He and his people did great works in Gondor and Rohan. For Minas Tirith they forged gates of mithril and steel to replace those broken by the Witch-king. Legolas his friend also brought south Elves out of Greenwood, and they dwelt in Ithilien, and it became once again the fairest country in all the westlands.
But when King Elessar gave up his life Legolas followed at last the desire of his heart and sailed over Sea.
Here follows one of the last notes in the Red Book
We have heard tell that Legolas took Gimli Gloinâs son with him because of their great friendship, greater than any that has been between Elf and Dwarf. If this is true, then it is strange indeed: that a Dwarf should be willing to leave Middle-Earth for any love, or that the Eldar should receive him, or that the Lords of the West should permit it. But it is said that Gimli went also out of a desire to see again the beauty of Galadriel; and it may be that she, being mighty among the Eldar, obtained this grace for him. More cannot be said of this matter.â
Appendix B:
â1541 â In this year on March 1st came at last the Passing of King Elessar. It is said that the beds of Meriadoc and Peregrin were set beside the bed of the great king. Then Legolas built a grey ship in Ithilien, and sailed down Anduin and so over Sea; and with him, it is said, went Gimli the Dwarf. And when that ship passed an end was come in Middle-Earth of the Fellowship of the Ring.â
Several Notes:
Firstly: Gimli was named Elf-friend because of the great love and friendship that grew between him and Legolas, âgreater than any that has been between Elf and Dwarfâ
Secondly: It is, indeed, considered absolutely baffling to everybody that Legolas could have successfully managed to smuggle a dwarf into elf heaven, and that Gimli would have been willing to go (that a dwarf would go âfor any loveâ)
Thirdly: Best guess anyone has is that they maybe flattered Galadriel enough for her to successfully bully gods into letting them in
Fourthly: Legolas built the ship. Legolas. The landlocked forest elf whoâs never sailed an ocean or seen the Undying Lands in his life, and neither have any of his people. Now, granted, there was about a hundred years between the Quest and them sailing, so probably, hopefully, there was enough time for Legolas to learn ship-building and navigation and all that, but still. Legolas learned how to build himself and Gimli a ship, from scratch, to sail across an unknown ocean to an elf heaven that mortals cannot reach in hopes of staying together
Fifthly: Gimli went along with this. Gimli son of Gloin got into Legolasâ homemade boat and sailed across an ocean neither of them knew on the hope that Legolas could somehow smuggle him into elf heaven against all precedent and history at the end of it. Like, either Gimli just had complete and utter faith in Legolas and in the elves heâd known whoâd gone before them, OR Gimli considered it worth it to die lost on the ocean just to accompany Legolas as much of the way as he could
I love these two so much, because on the one hand Iâm crying about the faith and friendship, and on the other hand Iâm just reconsidering once again that, in Gimliâs old age, when pretty much all their other friends were dead or gone west, this pair of idiots decided to build a ship from scratch, sail an ocean, and smuggle a dwarf into elf heaven, because fuck it, whatâs the worst that could happen? Gimliâs going to die eventually regardless. Might as well at least attempt the impossible on the way, you know?
They were resolutely ridiculously right up to their literal (un)dying day, and I adore them
Enjoying the image of galadriel successfully bullying gods to get gimli into elf heaven
Iâm sorry but where is the nine hour masterpiece of 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
Julia Stiles as Katerina âKatâ Stratford
10 THINGS I HATE ABOUT YOU (1999) dir. Gil Junger
Why did âbe critical of your mediaâ turn into âfind all its flaws and hate itâ why did people become allergic to FUN
Because people confuse âcritical as in critical thinkingâ with âcritical as in criticizing something,â so they think that âlook for something bad, no matter how far-fetchedâ is what âbeing criticalâ means.
They also donât realize that âliterary criticismâ meansâŚ
Okay. What literary criticism IS, is like taking a mechanical clock apart to see all the gears and learn how it fits together and approach your next clock with more knowledge of what makes it tick.
What they THINK literary criticism means is, you take the clock apart and beat all the pieces with a hammer, then scream at it because it doesnât tick for you the way it used to.
OMG SOMEBODY PUT IT IN WORDS
Itâs all well and good to use âbe critical of what you consumeâ to mean âdonât follow things blindly and acknowledge their flawsâ but this mindset fails to take into account that everything has flaws. An unproblematic fave is just a fave you havenât looked at from all angles yet. If you go through life like this hoping to find something morally pure to consume youâre just going to be miserable.