It Is MoonSpyder my dudes

#shade thrown

so a tourist in Italy is fulfilling her lifelong dream of seeing the birth of venus, her fave painting, in person. and while she’s there a Hot Girl strikes up a conversation with her and she loves art and is charming and they talk until the museum closes. they exchange numbers. the next day the birth of Venus painting is stolen, nobody knows who stole it. so anyways, the two girls continue dating and are happy and shit? and on their one year anniversary her girlfriend reveals that she’s an international art thief and she stole the birth of venus after meeting her. tourist girl flips and wants it returned she doesn’t want to just. hoard the art so nobody can see it. so then art thief has to do a reverse heist where she sneaks the painting back into the museum without getting caught

Bear in mind that the Birth of Venus is like 15 feet tall and 30 feet wide…

why would you have to do a reverse heist instead of like thouroughly cleaning it of fingerprints, DNA and other trace evidence and then just quietly dropping it off round the back underneath a tarp and a note attached

because she’s gay and loves drama don’t ever question me again

@copperbadge this is right up your alley

100% in agreement with @violetfutches, there’s a time for pragmatism and a time for drama, and the time for pragmatism is never a) a year into a gay romance that began with the theft of the Birth of Venus or b) anywhere in Italy.

White dudes have this thing where they believe your best friend in the world can have opposing political ideas. You’re supposed to be able to have healthy debate and disagreeing shouldn’t harm your friendship. That’s gross and stupid. Its really easy to say that when all your disagreements are theoretical. Its easy to say when none of the laws passed actually effect your life. Fighting with your best friend about corporate regulations, school charters, educational funding, abortion, health care, voting restrictions, drug laws, taxes and all sorts of stuff is cool and lively because none of it is going to actually leave you in a bad spot. Its different for the rest of us. I can’t be friends with you if you think I shouldn’t be allowed to vote. We can’t be friends if you think my friends shouldn’t have the ability to designate whatever gender they want and have that be legally recognized. We can’t be friends if you think I don’t deserve health care. Or if you think native children should be ripped away from their cultures and people. We can’t be friends if you think closing down health care clinics in an attempt to end safe legal abortions is a good thing. All these theoretical political ideas and lively debates effect real people, and I won’t be friends with someone who disagrees with me on them. Because disagreement means you don’t see me or a whole bunch of my friends and family as human beings worthy of rights and respect.

why I will not accept agree to disagree anymore

When people moan about how politics use to be “civil” what they’re really complaining about is the entry into the debate of the people those policies actually effect. Bit hard to be “civil” when it’s your livelihood or your bodily rights on the line

Civil, my ass. Leading up to the American Civil War, senators and congress members were known to attack each other in the Senate and House with canes and knives.

We need to bring that back because I bet the Speaker of the House would be a bit less likely to be a completely deplorable human being if he knew it would get him shanked like Julius Caesar.

the grand table in the British House of Commons (and copied in Westminster-style parliaments in many other countries) has a width of ‘two sword-lengths’

White dudes have this thing where they believe your best friend in the world can have opposing political ideas. You’re supposed to be able to have healthy debate and disagreeing shouldn’t harm your friendship. That’s gross and stupid. Its really easy to say that when all your disagreements are theoretical. Its easy to say when none of the laws passed actually effect your life. Fighting with your best friend about corporate regulations, school charters, educational funding, abortion, health care, voting restrictions, drug laws, taxes and all sorts of stuff is cool and lively because none of it is going to actually leave you in a bad spot. Its different for the rest of us. I can’t be friends with you if you think I shouldn’t be allowed to vote. We can’t be friends if you think my friends shouldn’t have the ability to designate whatever gender they want and have that be legally recognized. We can’t be friends if you think I don’t deserve health care. Or if you think native children should be ripped away from their cultures and people. We can’t be friends if you think closing down health care clinics in an attempt to end safe legal abortions is a good thing. All these theoretical political ideas and lively debates effect real people, and I won’t be friends with someone who disagrees with me on them. Because disagreement means you don’t see me or a whole bunch of my friends and family as human beings worthy of rights and respect.

why I will not accept agree to disagree anymore

When people moan about how politics use to be “civil” what they’re really complaining about is the entry into the debate of the people those policies actually effect. Bit hard to be “civil” when it’s your livelihood or your bodily rights on the line

Civil, my ass. Leading up to the American Civil War, senators and congress members were known to attack each other in the Senate and House with canes and knives.

We need to bring that back because I bet the Speaker of the House would be a bit less likely to be a completely deplorable human being if he knew it would get him shanked like Julius Caesar.

the grand table in the British House of Commons (and copied in Westminster-style parliaments in many other countries) has a width of ‘two sword-lengths’

^ This though