To the bold ff.net user in 2013 who tried to write Moby-Dick from the whaleâs perspective, please get back here you were cooking

shark vs the universe
taylor price
Cosimo Galluzzi

⣠Chile in a Photography âŁ
ojovivo

tannertan36
d e v o n

romaâ
Today's Document
YOU ARE THE REASON
Sweet Seals For You, Always

bliss lane
Cookie Run:Kingdom Official!

izzy's playlists!
tumblr dot com

oozey mess
𩵠avery cochrane đŠľ
sheepfilms

if i look back, i am lost
seen from Bangladesh
seen from United States
seen from Venezuela

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia

seen from Malaysia

seen from Canada
seen from Sweden
seen from United Arab Emirates
seen from Malawi
seen from Germany

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Brazil
seen from India
seen from India

seen from Pakistan
seen from Colombia

seen from Germany
@maddie-grove
To the bold ff.net user in 2013 who tried to write Moby-Dick from the whaleâs perspective, please get back here you were cooking

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
Your maternal grandfather:
Fuck that dude
Meh (leaning negative)
Meh (leaning positive)
Love that dude
I don't know her
Another nuance
Your paternal grandfather
Fuck that dude
Meh (leaning negative)
Meh (leaning positive)
Love that dude
I don't know her
Another nuance
Meanwhile, on the boxed set of Twin Peaks I paid $49.99 for with the worst captioning I've seen in my life
after looking at that orc in 16th century clothes painting I realized just how much I fucking hate medieval fantasy clothing. looks like absolute shit compared to real historical clothes. yes even you lord of the rings.
Yeah. I love historical fantasy clothes in theory, but in practice people almost always fuck up the proportions and ruin it.
some of you are really missing the whole "fantasy" aspect of fantasy.
We are not missing that it's fantasy, we are simply fantasizing about better and more interesting clothing, according to our own personal opinions on what's better and more interesting.

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
reblog and tag a tag that you have blocked
I wonder if Jenna Maroneyâs song âRum-Soaked Tamponâ helped bridge the gap between her âBallsâ era and âI Caught Crabs in Paradise.â
tumblr users yearn for the much-maligned genre of "iowa writers workshop divorce litfic"
The thing about adaptations that change a lot of stuff from the original is that, however legitimate it is for an adaptation to do its own thing, it is really noticeable when the changes result in something that is less interesting/intelligent/distinctive than the original. It might even be okay but I donât think itâs media illiteracy to point out that someone took a filet mignon and made it into Hot Pockets.
I also donât think the âoh, weâre not going to have sex tonight just because the government expects us toâ resolution works when the state-sanctioned sex night is so stingy. You only have twelve hours, itâs not a holiday, and you donât even get free condoms. It sounds like a very begrudging government sex night! Youâre just policing yourself beyond what the state demands!

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
Four different people at the nursing home I worked at had this clock. It was a lot, let me tell you.
my grandmother had this clock. we buried her with it.
I remember years ago when that movie Leap Day came out and people dunked on the âAmy Adams is going to propose to her boyfriend on Leap Day, because (per Irish tradition) thatâs the one day a year women can propose to menâ concept. Which probably wasnât helped by the fact that she never actually proposes to her boyfriend or her real love interest in the movie. But, crucially, nobodyâs forcing Amy Adams to adhere to that rule. She will not be thrown in Irish or American prison if she proposes on another day of the year. She will pay no fine. She will not be excommunicated by the Catholic Church (assuming sheâs Catholic in the first place). Honestly I donât think the âwomen proposingâ bit ends up figuring that much into the movie? Which is a different problem. The point is that Leap Day only asks you to wrestle with issues like âwhy do women construct prisons for themselvesâ and âhow offensive is this movie to the Irish.â Not âif the penalty for violation of the sex ban is merely a fine except in the case of repeat offenses, does this mean that having sex is essentially legal but expensive for the rich/very rich but potentially life-ruining for the poor/medium-income, just like stealing or illegal parking in real life?â
One of my issues with Easy A was that I could never get on board with even slightly frowning upon Olive for telling Mr. Griffith about his guidance-counselor wife cheating on him with a student and giving him chlamydia. I get the utility of having a protagonist make impulsive choices that hurt others and I donât think cheaters should be exposed at all costs, but the guidance counselor is so awful and itâs so fucked-up that she tells Olive about that stuff that it just doesnât work for me.
Upon reflection, I donât really agree with all the variants on âthe straights want to be oppressed so badâ re: One Night Only. The foregrounding of the straight main coupleâs struggles to get laid while the heroineâs gay roommate is (apparently) just like âno biggie, gay people are used to this shitâ* does support that reaction, as does the notion that the ban got applied to all single people at once, arguably. But US history** abounds with examples of people (especially women) being penalized by the government or other institutions for having anything but marital procreative sex. An incomplete list:
Laws directly against premarital/extramarital sex;
Laws directly against âsodomyâ (sometimes enforced only against gay couples in practice, but not always);
Torts based on non-marital sex (seduction, alienation of affection);
Birth control bans (either for everyone or for single people specifically);
Abortion bans (including laws not outright banning it but making it more difficult to obtain one);
State-mandated abstinence-only sex education;
The concept of an âillegitimateâ child;
The treatment of unwed mothers (unwed mothersâ homes, stingy/punitive benefits, political rhetoric about âwelfare queensâ); and
Victim-blaming based on âpromiscuityâ in rape cases.
(Racism enters into all of these, and other people have mentioned laws against interracial marriage.)
The movieâs in bad taste, IMO, specifically because it treats the sex ban as a cute, not-so-bad obstacle to romance in a climate where weâre losing reproductive rights and regressive attitudes are on the rise.
*I also feel like this is a bizarre attitude when microchips are involved, but thatâs another issue.
**Not just US history, obviously, but the movie is set in the US and the ban appears to be US-only.
I haven't seen this movie and I don't plan to, but it's pretty clearly a mismatch of subject and genre in that it's a satirical concept paired up with a romcom plot. If you gave this idea to Yorgos Lanthimos or Radu Jude or some other satirist you could get a good satire about our hypocrisy about sex out of it, but "sex is illegal, jail is possible" is just not working for a romantic comedy.
I feel like the choices they (apparently) make about the setting/rules really ups the foreboding factor, too. If it were more futuristic/fantastical/an alternate universe where things had always been this way or worse, or if the prohibition was against something less grounded in reality (sex without True Love or some nonsense), it could maybe be feasibly employed in a story that wasnât dystopian horror. But itâs just contemporary with some (barely) speculative elements! The sex ban is only three years old! And itâs just some Project 2025 shit!
I did not spend years of my life at university studying rome in classes that were over 50% women to let someone say "rome may be for the guys" on my post!!!
men aren't obsessed with Rome they're obsessed with being patriarchs who get to subjugate everyone around them. He doesn't care about Pliny the Elder, he's having wet dreams where he gets to be Caesar. It's unironically the new vegas thing, we're living in an age beyond on-the-nose satire. This was also mussolini's deal

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
Itâs directed by the same guy who did Easy A? Fascinating.
Upon reflection, I donât really agree with all the variants on âthe straights want to be oppressed so badâ re: One Night Only. The foregrounding of the straight main coupleâs struggles to get laid while the heroineâs gay roommate is (apparently) just like âno biggie, gay people are used to this shitâ* does support that reaction, as does the notion that the ban got applied to all single people at once, arguably. But US history** abounds with examples of people (especially women) being penalized by the government or other institutions for having anything but marital procreative sex. An incomplete list:
Laws directly against premarital/extramarital sex;
Laws directly against âsodomyâ (sometimes enforced only against gay couples in practice, but not always);
Torts based on non-marital sex (seduction, alienation of affection);
Birth control bans (either for everyone or for single people specifically);
Abortion bans (including laws not outright banning it but making it more difficult to obtain one);
State-mandated abstinence-only sex education;
The concept of an âillegitimateâ child;
The treatment of unwed mothers (unwed mothersâ homes, stingy/punitive benefits, political rhetoric about âwelfare queensâ); and
Victim-blaming based on âpromiscuityâ in rape cases.
(Racism enters into all of these, and other people have mentioned laws against interracial marriage.)
The movieâs in bad taste, IMO, specifically because it treats the sex ban as a cute, not-so-bad obstacle to romance in a climate where weâre losing reproductive rights and regressive attitudes are on the rise.
*I also feel like this is a bizarre attitude when microchips are involved, but thatâs another issue.
**Not just US history, obviously, but the movie is set in the US and the ban appears to be US-only.