No one tells you that one day you will get older and look around and notice that 95% of ppl who own a dog should not own a dog

@theartofmadeline
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
EXPECTATIONS
wallacepolsom
The Bowery Presents

Andulka
tumblr dot com

romaβ
taylor price

pixel skylines

oozey mess
d e v o n
macklin celebrini has autism
Cosmic Funnies
ojovivo

Love Begins
untitled
The Stonewall Inn

Game of Thrones Daily
seen from India

seen from Tunisia
seen from United States

seen from Canada

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from United States
seen from Canada

seen from Australia

seen from Australia

seen from Malaysia

seen from Portugal

seen from TΓΌrkiye
seen from Malaysia

seen from Germany

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from Brazil
seen from China
@jonaldronaldrolkientolkien
No one tells you that one day you will get older and look around and notice that 95% of ppl who own a dog should not own a dog

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
I had a lot of/still have some vestigial arrogance about quantitative methods over qualitative ones, probably in a combination of scientific misogyny + STEMlord superiority. But doing regression analysis and quant-heavy data analysis makes me realise more and more that you can justify basically any claim with numbers, and that you can construct your research in such a way as to output the numbers you want. which does not mean that all data are made up or that quantitative knowledge is all false. I think stories about scientists straight up inventing numbers or fudging experiments on purpose prove that there is a real difference between fraudulent and non-fraudulent research. but those data must always be narrativised & are always already narrativised. The act of presenting numbers itself is doing some of that narration because youβre already arguing that these numbers are worth presenting
People in the notes are rightfully pointing out common issues with data manipulation and pre-loaded conclusions in scientific research (i.e., the academic version of asking "so, how often do you beat your wife?" and so on), but I should have clarified that I'm not really talking about that. I'm talking about completely legitimate, above-board scientific research.
For example, I've had students ask me (in good faith) how it was possible for international medical bodies to report different counts of COVID-19 cases during the early years of the pandemic. And one of the answers is that you need to first define what you mean by a "COVID-19 case." Do you include self-reported incidences? Waste water data? Geo-fenced social media posts about people complaining about their coronavirus symptoms? Federal estimates? Hospital data? How do you compare countries/territories/substate entities with mandatory reporting mechanisms vs countries/territories/substate entities that rely only on voluntary self-reported cases? And what combination of these do you use? How you construct what you mean by "case" is going to impact the outcomes you report. These different counts of COVID-19 cases can all be true simultaneously, not because numbers are made up, but because they all come out of different methodologies that can be equally valid.
And this is true across all science, not just social science. Bill Clinton said it best lol: "it depends on what your definition of the word 'is' is." This feels obvious when you look at scientific research that uses "skull measurements" as their object of analysis - the concept itself is white supremacist, regardless of how "sound" the research is. But even something as apparently self-evident as a COVID-19 case still requires a definition, and how you define your variables is necessarily going to impact how the research goes and what conclusions are drawn.
These definitions are always embedded in political & social assumptions. And again, this does not mean that science is all made up or nonsense or whatever. There is a widespread fetishism of "objective knowledge" that is itself ideological - the idea that knowledge can be divorced from all historical and political contexts, that you can scrub bias from research and simply report the facts. Valuable, well-supported, well-constructed scientific research is always embedded in these contexts. Not just as a result of researcher assumptions, but of the material context it exists in - what research resources are available, how & what research gets funded, the academy's relationship to the state & non-government bodies that both provide data and use that research to inform policy, the historical relationships universities often have with settler-colonialism and imperialism that give them access to "foreign" research subjects, etc etc etc.
So my overall point (which I didn't communicate well) is that data can always say what you want to some extent, for good and for ill. And research results (at least in my experience) tend to surprise you in ways that require explanations, which themselves can be fully justified, but again, exist within many different contexts that influence how you interpret them - and not just the results themselves, but your own surprise at your results
People who are like, viciously against prison abolition confuse me. I'll admit that, in the end, I also struggle to imagine a world in which, even when nobody has any reason to, someone or another won't act in a way that could only be solved with restricting their autonomy. But people who would act in such a way, even when all their needs and wants are taken care of, in a society that has methods of healing and retribution that isn't punishment, are exceedingly rare. People will do unreasonable things, even in a perfect world, but the amount of people who will do unreasonable things repeatedly with no way of stopping them are astronomically rare.
Best case scenario, we find a way around this issue and the number of people in prison is 0 (a way around that doesn't involve killing people, I will clarify). Worst case scenario, we don't, but the vast majority of people who would be in prison now most likely did not act in the way that originally got them in trouble and, in the scenario they still did, had ways of making up for that and doing better that does not involve punishment (which exasperates the issue). Its a win-win either way, but since prison abolitionists don't have a magic solution for every problem people are willing to throw away the whole concept, even when working towards that goal will only lead to benefits even if it is never 100% achieved.
I feel like this sort of thing maps over (nearly) identically to psych abolition, mainly because psychiatry is a carceral in itself. It is an extension of the prison system.
"What about the ~violent evil schizophrenics/murderers/rapists/sociopaths/etc~" has never been a productive question, because it misunderstands the whole concept at its very basis. "Restricting autonomy is inhumane, we should work towards a world that does not restrict autonomy as much as possible" has always been the thesis.
You get it.
(emerges 3 hours later covered in blood) i figured out what emotion i was feeling
FMK: graph paper, dotted paper, lined paper
fuck graph, marry dotted, kill lined
fuck graph, marry lined, kill dotted
fuck dotted, marry graph, kill lined
fuck dotted, marry lined, kill graph
fuck lined, marry dotted, kill graph
fuck lined, marry graph, kill dotted
no lines on my paper thank you (<- asexual)

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
Babysitting a toddler is a lot like being the narration in a point-and-click adventure game. Watching him knock on the doors of empty rooms and saying "hmm. I don't think anyone's in there". Watching him attempt to use [spoon] on [cat] and saying "I don't think those things go together". Watching him throw a cup of water onto the floor and just commenting "the floor is wet now" when he looks up at me to see if I approve.
_i'~P1K&.
u2[GrL)V|>Z2
[)EmLL?>
^:)"
rtF)
Calico out there putting tuxedo on the mats
I saw a post on a terf blog before I blocked it from someone being like "Ummm is anybody else really concerned about the rise of antisocial kinks like pissing" and it made me laugh so hard I almost did a little antisocial kink myself
The notion of pro-social vs antisocial kinks is itself hysterical to me. As though there's no way to be abusive and exploitative in an orgy, as though there's no way to achieve immense intimacy and care by peeing on each other. Nothing needs to be intrinsically anything. Everything is a function of the people involved. And like not to Devil's Sacrament you but how are you even measuring the relative growth of piss kinks at all, I NEVER see that shit
Blocked for being funnier than me, all of you

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
Youβd think that once you finally get long term access to a cat and your yearning to have cat access is fulfilled that youβd become slightly less obsessed with seeing peopleβs cats but no if anything it gets worse
The fastest way to accomplish The Project is to cease being afraid of The Project. The Project cannot maim you. The Project cannot kill you. The Project is more afraid of you than you are of it. It is okay if The Project turns out differently from how it was in your head, and it is okay if it has flaws. You are capable of engaging with The Project.
I don't need a "theory" for what happened to Flint at the end of Black Sails, I read Treasure Island. He turned into a parrot.
Polyamory is safe for work. Polyamory is safe for kids. Polyamory is safe for day time tv. Polyamory isnβt more sexual than any other relationship and it can be just as romantic, sweet, and healthy.
Aggressively reblogs.

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
This is a story about the worst burrito ever.
Click here to read it.
there's something really fun about how like. according to all Sources i have found many sailors abandoned the royal navy for piracy because the navy was so hierarchical and the officers were given so much power and piracy was the more egalitarian and democratic option. but flint comes from the navy as someone who managed to work his way up to officer and as someone who seems to prefer to function inside those rigid structures, or at least to be most at home there. so even as he is ostensibly fighting for the greater egalitarianism of the pirate world and of progressive values in general it's just not something that he personally is able to value. he doesn't have a democratic bone in his body. he went to the pirate republic talking about kings and wanting to quite literally run it like the navy and tried to fight for that pirate republic while acting like his word was law and every democratic proceeding was an annoying hinderance to his dictatorial rule. it's so good. i like him
#yessss. i have written a few mini essays about this in the tags of posts but#this is one of my favorite things about flint. and it's so interesting to see toby stephens reference coriolanus#where being a great commander does not make you a great politician. and that is exactly flint's deal#he has that whole speech in s1 about how the crew needs certainty. and with the way he runs his crew he's absolutely right#he is such a brilliant commander and that let him rise thru the ranks despite not being a lord#and now he's stuck in nassau and he's making a lot of calls that are correct but now he needs consensus to do things#and you can see it drive him mad. bc he's really fucking smart. he knows what to do he just needs the crew#to listen to him instead of needing to lead them to the right decision. this is why flint always needs a partner#he needs someone to bridge the gap between him and the crew. to get them to listen to him so he can do his thing#his frustration with everyone being so many steps behind him brings so much friction to s1 and 2 especially. and it slaps
@thotifypremium 's tags. so trueeee