I think that when you're overstimulated you should appear kind of grayed out and no one should be able to interact with you like a locked character in a video game
Game of Thrones Daily
will byers stan first human second

JBB: An Artblog!
đŞź
d e v o n
RMH

Product Placement
dirt enthusiast
Alisa U Zemlji Chuda
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
Misplaced Lens Cap
Cosmic Funnies

if i look back, i am lost

@theartofmadeline
i don't do bad sauce passes
Aqua Utopiaď˝ćľˇăŽĺşă§č¨ćśăç´Ąă

ellievsbear
Claire Keane
$LAYYYTER

seen from TĂźrkiye

seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
seen from Indonesia
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from Canada
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Italy
seen from Malaysia

seen from Belgium
@maharetr
I think that when you're overstimulated you should appear kind of grayed out and no one should be able to interact with you like a locked character in a video game

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
The negative gearing/capital gains tax changes are really simple and benefit regular people
The media (owned by rich people) are currently going "WOW? SO CONFUSING! BAD LABOR BUDGET BAD! MASSIVE TAX HIKES!" but what actually is happening?
Negative gearing ISN'T being abolished. Literally everyone who already benefited from it on their investment portfolios continues to have it. Anyone complaining and saying they're going to raise the rent because it's made things less profitable for them is lying and a scumbag.
The change is going forward any ADDITIONAL properties an investor wants to get tax breaks on can only be applied to NEW builds, thus encouraging investors to build new properties (instead of buying all the currently existing ones and driving prices up). So who is negatively impacted by this? Literally no one. Who does this benefit? Anyone who wants to live in a house because it increases housing supply and makes the housing market less competitive for investors vs home owners.
Really simple.
What about capital gains tax discount? Basically, in the 90s John Howard made it so that when you sold a house you'd get a 50% discount where half of the profit wasn't taxed. Investors went woohoo! Bought up all the affordable houses to drive prices up and make a big profit. It fueled the housing crisis for the past 30 years. But Labor went "actually, what if we just tax it at 30% instead with no discount?" So instead of half of the money being tax free, it's all taxed. You know... like how making money normally works???
30% is still actually lower than the top two income tax brackets so rich people will still manage to make lots of money without having to work BUT... they'll just have to pay a little tax. BUT only on profit. If a property makes a loss it's not taxed. The amount of tax is also adjusted down relative to inflation so a $100,000 profit isn't taxed $30,000 but actually less depending on how much inflation happened during the time the asset was held.
Also capital gains tax doesn't apply to the home you live in so unless you're a property investor YOU'RE NOT GETTING TAXED! THE VAST MAJORITY OF AUSTRALIANS ARE NOT BEING AFFECTED HERE AND YET WE'RE SEEING WIDE PUBLIC OUTRAGE OVER A TAX DESIGNED TO MAKE THE HOUSING MARKET LESS COMPETITIVE AND THUS EASIER FOR HOME OWNERS TO ENTER IT.
This budget literally mostly just slightly inconveniences the 1% of investors who own a WHOPPING 25% OF INVESTMENT PROPERTIES IN AUSTRALIA.
The capital gains tax discount was never for working Australians! It was never for you! It was always just a tax perk for investors to encourage them to buy up houses away from those who needed them and hike up rents. Labor fixed that.
No wonder the rich media moguls and politicians who make most of their money off property investments like Pauline Hanson and Angus Taylor are mad about it and want YOU to be mad too. They don't want to pay taxes! Booo! The problem is: if we can't get the uber-wealthy to pay a little bit of tax then YOU will NEVER own a home!
So the changes are really simple. They're mild. And yet the right is outraged over how it even slightly benefits working and ordinary Australians.
Fucking ridiculous.
Already know I wanna send this to people on June 1
Audio:
Erika, referencing ebenezer scrooge: You, boy! What day is it?!
Brennan, as a young boy: It's Pride, bitch!
i swear to god if people don't start understanding that responding to doylist critique of a piece of media with watsonian exonerations is not an actual rebuttal
somebody saying "hey i don't like that the only gay man in this story is a weird pervert and it portrays gay sexual promiscuity as a moral failing and character flaw" cannot be rebuked by arguing about how the character's backstory or personality traits explain their behaviour. the choices made by a writer are all fundamentally mutable; somebody saying an author's choices should have been different is not going to be persuaded by an argument that takes those choices as immovable fact
[Image ID: Tweet from Bae Blade (@/ Spinny_3000) reading: The greatest stumbling block to media literacy is how many people think of stories as just documentaries of fictional worlds. /End ID]
I actually do think we should discourage women from becoming housewives. Do not become financially dependent on a man. That's how a lot of women ended up dead over the years. A man gets violent suddenly and you have to choose between homelessness or potentially dying at his hand because you have an enormous gap in your resume and no degrees or certifications or anything that will help you pursue a career that will allow you to be financially independent. He owns your bank account. His name is probably the one on the car. Try and leave and he can report it stolen. Where will you go then?
Don't become a housewife.
And if you do become a housewife, take steps to protect yourself. Make sure youâre legally married, for starters; stay-at-home girlfriends have very little legal recourse to claim their partnerâs assets in a breakup. Make sure your name is on the house deed/rental agreement, and have your car in your name, even if your spouse is paying for it. Have your spouse transfer money every month into an account solely in your name, so you can buy yourself things without needing permission, but also so you can save up to leave if needed.
If your spouse fights you on any of this, then donât quit your job. The tradwife to poverty pipeline is real, and so is financial abuse.
also, many women/people experience controlling behaviour and domestic violence from their partner for the first time during pregnancy. donât risk thinking âheâs just stressed, itâll get better when the baby comesâ because it wonât. neither you and your child will ever be safe with that man. get out as early and safely as you can

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
My favorite joke in Metalocalypse is how as the show goes on it becomes increasingly obvious theyâre naming characters with the sole purpose of torturing Mark Hamill.
Itâs been almost two years since I posted this but hereâs a list of the official spelling of every character he introduces here:
Dr. Gibbitz
Dr. Amon Skagerakk Fredrickshaven
Dr. Donald Gorthian
Ronald Von Momnaldberg
Dr. Natasha Nesciantskidovich
Vicenzo de Alimamala Corningston IIIÂ
Professor Jerry Gustav Mangledink
Horace Marmingblat Wimplestein, Jr.
Dr. Chazz Fazzledopenhoffer
Vater Oorlag
Dr. Milminaman-lanilim-swinwamly
Dr. Gibbitz again (but for some reason itâs spelled âGibbetzâ in the season 2 subtitles)
Melmord Fjordslorn
Dr. Ralphus Galkinsmelter
Dr. Amomolith Chesterfield
Wilmore Unduntingiminen
Dr. Ninmiltrid Fmiltindryden
Dr. Imptnin Pmiltson
Dr. Tormindbind Mickmildididindnin
Dr. Krumpworth Chponglasia IV, Jr.
Dr. Borgermu Barret SwingdworthÂ
Dr. Richard Reinhold Rnawighiwowpj
Captain Slufgyflaysid
Dr. Bartholomew Grahsrihajul
Dr. Alsajahb FifborgiltkÂ
Dr. Fsmilejera IrlelwollÂ
Dr. Commander Vernmim Chuntspinkton
Like I just love how you can pinpoint âNinmiltrid Fmiltindrydenâ as the exact moment the joke went from making Mark Hamill say funny but still vaguely name-shaped words to forcing that poor man to pronounce straight up keysmashes out loud.
Weird and wonderful compilation of strange bird noises.
Hello sir would you like your bird sounds today in Siren, Machinery, or Ghost
@elodieunderglass
Thank you so much, I canât pick my favourite!
Number 3, the sturnus vulgaris is just glorious!
Slightly sad there's no Eider duck on the list but what a marvelous collection.
@derinthescarletpescatarian today we also have them in Squeaky Toy
They should just bite the bullet and make a female James Bond. Hot, athletic, suave. She wears tuxedos with a somewhat feminine cut, drinks vodka martinis, drives sports cars, and goes by "James", because why not.
Also, because this is incredibly important to Bond for some reason, she needs to be an incredibly predatory, womanizing lesbian. Some perfectly happy married straight woman needs to become gay by the end of the movie.
We live in the future, and we can admit that all of the cool things that a Male James Bond can do are things a Female James Bond can do. But at all costs, we need to avoid making this thing feel "woke" of self-aware. If Female Bond is not exactly as toxic and awesome as any of the male ones, we will have failed, and might as well be making another franchise.
really fond of this bathroom graffiti at my school. peeing?
[Image ID: a sketch of a butterfly and the text: this action will have consequences... and then in a different pen and handwriting: 'peeing?']
Source

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
"Kill your local sex offender!" Oh, you mean the guy who went streaking at his local college football game on a dare one time? That's a sex crime.
"No, I mean-"
Oh, maybe the woman who had to pee in a public park that only had pay toilets, so she tried to hide behind the bushes but got caught? Public urination is a sex crime.
"What? No, I mean-"
Oh, maybe you mean the homeless guy who had to strip down to get his clothes in the laundromat to clean them for the first time in weeks? He tried being subtle, but someone called the cops on him, and now he's on the sex offender registry for public nudity.
"Rapists and pedophiles! Kill rapists and pedophiles!"
Oh, like the trans woman who got called a pedophile groomer for helping a trans kid escape her abusive parents?
Or maybe the black man who got labeled a rapist because he came on to another man's wife, and he decided to get back at him by charging him with rape?
How about the 17 year olds who were fooling around, fully consensually, in one of their bedrooms? That's still technically underage sex and thus rape of a minor.
Oh, or maybe you're talking about the doctor who performed genital reconstructive surgery in a state that just voted to get that classified as rape?
People will do everything they can to get you convinced rape and pedophilia are the worst crimes possible, then accuse whoever they like the least of being either a rapist, a pedophile, or both, counting on you turning on them just for being accused of the crime.
"Oh, so you're saying you don't want to kill a serial rapist?"
That's exactly what I'm goddamn saying.
Once we decide a group is okay to kill, the government will do everything they can to convince you that their political enemies are either part of that group, or just as bad as that group, to get you to kill their enemies for them.
The only way out is to accept every life as worth saving.
EDIT: If you're going to go on this post to say that no, you think you really should be allowed to kill people you decide are rapists and/or pedophiles, I'm going to block you. I have already been blocking you, because it's clear that you aren't willing to engage with what I'm saying.
Also, if someone says something like that we'd be better off with rapists being dead BUT that they won't let that opinion shape their stance on public policy, and you reply to that person to accuse them of wanting to murder people, I'm also going to block you, because what the fuck that's a completely different sentence.
EDIT 2: Since so many people seem to fail basic reading comprehension, let's state it again, in different words:
1. Killing people is bad.
2. Killing someone can never be undone by any means we have.
3. If the government can kill people, they will want to kill their political opposition and other undesirables (WHICH CAN INCLUDE YOU PERSONALLY AND ANY IF NOT ALL OF YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY).
4. If there is a class of people OF ANY TYPE who the government can LEGALLY KILL, they now just need to convince you their enemies count as that class (ever wondered why there's so much emphasis on claiming gay people are pedophiles? Now you know!)
5. If there is a class of people OF ANY TYPE that the public can LEGALLY KILL, murderers just need to convince people that their victims counted as that class (I murdered him because he's a rapist. Anyway now his job is free promote me into that position plz.)
6. As pointed out in the notes (thank you everyone pointing this out!), if the penalty for a crime is death, people are much more willing to silence witnesses to that crime (for example, murdering their rape victims), which is EVEN WORSE than just committing the initial crime.
7. THEREFORE the only way to keep those from happening is to have NO category of people it is considered okay to kill FOR ANY REASON.
Queer people are hugely over represented on sex offender registries, and are more likely to have been assaulted since being placed on a registry.
practicing self care less out of self love and more for the sheer logical reasoning of itâd be kinda stupid of me to expect myself to be able to function without proper maintenance
âoh i donât deserve rest and relaxation, i havenât done enough, i havenât earned itâ and my carâs breaks donât deserve break fluid because they arenât breaking well enough to earn it. thatâs what you sound like!!!!!
The reason why so many of y'all's feminism sucks is because you still believe deep down in your hearts that there are only two kinds of people in the world: precious, ethereal, fragile dollthings called "women", and violent, lustful, rage-fueled apes called "men". Until you throw that idea away, 3rd-grade-tier "girls rule boys drool, girls are princesses and boys are stinky :(" is as feminist as we'll ever get-- and I hope it's obvious that that's lightyears away from the bare minimum of where we need to be.
I don't know how I'm supposed to explain to ostensibly trans-friendly feminists that "women are beautiful soft things made of glass, men are obsessed with violence and sex" is exactly what the patriarchy wants you to believe. Patriarchy wants you to believe that being a woman and/or having a vagina (patriarchy generally believes those two things are synonymous) makes one shatter on impact with reality. It makes you easier to control if you are scared shitless of the other half of the population, and it makes you more compliant with your lot in life if you believe it is in the nature of the other half of the population to rape and kill rather than realise those were choices those individual rapists and murderers made. There is no way to make gender essentialism progressive and feminist, because it is one of patriarchy's tools of subjugation. Stop trying to make it progressive.
And I can scream all of that from the rooftops over and over again, and what I hear in reply is "Trans men really are men because no woman would ever decide to become an inherently evil repugnant rapist ape", and "You're so right. Trans women are women because they too are pretty delicate little objects I can fuck", and "You're non-binary? So are you fucktoy non-binary or sexpest non-binary?", and my patience runs ever thinner.
âThis portrayal of a marginalized group was wrong then and is wrong nowâ and âThis portrayal of a marginalized group was very progressive for the time period and paved the way for more representation while likely limited by factors outside of the creatorâs controlâ are two statements that can and should ABSOLUTELY coexist and be kept in mind when interacting with older media
Great example
[Image ID: The thing you have to keep in mind about Moby Dick is that it's an explicitly anti-racist text written by a white guy in the 1850s. So you end up with stuff like Ishmael spending an entire paragraph complimenting a Polynesian guy on his skull shape -- post by many-bees, Dec 19. 2022.
User vector-field-outpost quotes "#hashtag period-typical anti-racism" by @ kleefkruid]
Still firm on my idea that we should ban advertising.
In the Biotipist People's Republic the only advertistments you would get would be giant posters of Yuri Gagarin telling you to support space exploration.
There is this artwork (by British artist Marcus Coates) at Utrecht Centraal train station that I adore. Every day it shows a new fact about what's happening in nature on that day. For example in this picture I took last month, the sign says:
14/03 Today in nature: Litte moorhens start constructing their nests.
It never fails to cheer me up when I walk by there :3
20/05 Today in nature: The first red deer calf is born.
17/06 Today in nature: Bats are active again and catch thousands of insects at night.
15/08 Today in nature: The moles cast out their young.
21/08 Today in nature: Young bats are starting to catch insects by themselves, and no longer rely on their mothers' milk.
07/09 Today in nature: The last Common Branded Skippers (Hesperia Comma butterflies), show themselves while flying around.
10/11 Today in nature: Thousands of wild geese return from their nesting period in the far north.
08/01 Today in nature: During warm winters the small newt begins its breeding process.

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
How very depressing that Neil Gaiman had trended not even a tiny bit for demonstrating what a fucking horrific person he is.
As a reminder, he's suing Caroline Wallner, one of his accusers, for breaking her NDA. Not for libel. He's saying she shouldn't have told anyone about it, not that she lied.
The author says Wallner broke her NDA by sharing her story with the media, including with New York Magazine.
He doesn't need the money. He's risking the Streisand effect. He is punishing Caroline, he's trying to intimidate other victims who have signed NDAs to scare them into continued silence.
He is no friend to women, to the LGBTQIA+ community, to anyone quite frankly unless he thinks they are of value to him.
Share the story. Put it on Facebook and bluesky and whatever else you're on. Make it clear what a horrifying person he is. Tell your friends. He's paying Edendale a fortune to try and cover this up. Make this hard for him. Make it cost him money.
I can't speak for the women you hurt. I can only speak vaguely for all SA victims.
But down to the needle point... You painted a comfortable picture of death, and I loved you for that. And then you ripped that away and out of my life.
You broke my heart Neil. You don't get to do that.
Bringing this around again to remind people of what he has done.
I never expected him to be such a reprehensible person. I have an incredibly high tolerance for stories of abuse and what he did made even ME feel sick.
Springing off of my addiction post once more, I am also skeptical at best of 12-step programs, because their framework has just never remotely aligned with my actual experience.
The substance I was addicted to was heroin. While I was actively addicted, it absolutely came before everything else. My life shrank around it. I kept using despite very real, very obvious negative consequences. If youâre looking for something that fits the âcompulsion + harm + loss of controlâ model, that was it.
But whatâs always sat strangely with me is what happened when that context changed.
Once my abusive relationship ended and I was no longer in an environment where it was readily available, it was shockingly easy to stop. Iâm not saying it was physically comfortable. My body was pretty pissed off for a while. But psychologically, it just didnât have the same hold anymore. I wasnât spending my days white-knuckling cravings or constantly thinking about it. It dropped out of my life in a way that, according to the 12-step model, is not really supposed to happen.
And thatâs where my issue with that framework starts.
Because 12-step ideology tends to assume that if you have ever had that kind of relationship with one substance, it reveals something fundamental and permanent about you. That you now have a generalized âaddictive natureâ that will attach itself to other substances or behaviors if youâre not constantly managing it. That you are, in some essential way, always on the verge of transferring that pattern onto something else.
And that just hasnât been true for me.
I was a near-daily cannabis user for years. When it started consistently making me feel physically uncomfortable instead of good, I stopped. No drawn-out battle, no existential crisis, just âthis isnât giving me what I liked about it anymoreâ and I moved on.
I drink occasionally, in social or celebratory contexts, and I genuinely find alcohol kind of boring outside of that. It doesnât have much pull for me.
I tried gambling once, got annoyed at how tedious and overstimulating it felt, and left the casino in under an hour. I have not felt remotely compelled to revisit that experience.
I use the internet a lot, and I play a handful of video games, but I can also go on a camping trip with no signal and be completely fine, unless you want to try and find something pathological about nature photography, in which case you can blow it out your ass. If anything, I generally enjoy the change of pace. Thereâs no sense of panic or withdrawal or âI need to get back to my computer/consoles immediately.â
So when I hear the idea that addiction is this broad, transferable trait that will latch onto anything with quick reward or low friction, I just donât see it reflected in my own life.
What does make sense, looking back, is context.
When I was using heroin, I was in an abusive relationship. My environment was unstable, stressful, and honestly pretty bleak. The substance didnât just exist in a vacuum. It fit into a specific set of conditions where it functioned as relief, escape, and regulation.
When those conditions changed, the behavior changed with them.
That doesnât mean there was no dependency. There obviously was. It doesnât mean there were no consequences. There very much were. My grades suffered. I dropped out of college. I lost my apartment because staying out of withdrawal and numbing out from the abuse felt more important than paying rent.
But it does suggest that what we call âaddictionâ might not always be this permanent, identity-level trait that needs to be managed forever. Sometimes it looks a lot more like a relationship between a person, a substance, and a specific environment.
When thatâs the case, then a framework that assumes universality - âif this happened once, it will always be waiting to happen again, with anythingâ - is going to miss a lot of variation.
Iâm not saying 12-step programs canât help people. Clearly they can, or they likely wouldnât exist in the way they do. But I do think theyâre often treated as the model of addiction rather than a model that fits some people and not others, and when your experience doesnât match that model, many people who swear by them will assume that you are misunderstanding yourself, in denial, or ânot taking it seriously enough.â This paternalistic attitude only serves to make me even more skeptical of the framework.
For me, what mattered wasnât declaring myself permanently âaddictiveâ or treating every pleasurable behavior as a potential threat.
What mattered was getting out of the environment where that pattern made sense in the first place.
Rat Park, people. Stop forgetting about Rat Park.
âaddictionâ might not always be this permanent, identity-level trait... Sometimes it looks a lot more like a relationship between a person, a substance, and a specific environment.
I have helped change more individual behavior by changing the environment around them than I have by working on their behavior.