Until death, all defeat is psychological.
Monterey Bay Aquarium

Jimmy Eat World
d e v o n

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
Doug Jones

Game Changer & Make Some Noise
RMH

bliss lane

h
Show & Tell
cherry valley forever
Mike Driver
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
TMBGareOK. The Official They Might Be Giants tumblr

titsay

Love Begins
seen from France

seen from Spain
seen from Indonesia
seen from Germany

seen from Malaysia

seen from United States
seen from Brazil
seen from Ecuador
seen from Kazakhstan
seen from Australia
seen from Mexico

seen from Argentina
seen from Ukraine

seen from Canada
seen from Italy
seen from Spain
seen from Spain
seen from United States

seen from France
seen from United States
@nehfi
Until death, all defeat is psychological.

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
I don’t think we’re rick rolling each other enough anymore. 1. it CANNOT die out 2. this under saturated market is perfect for unsuspecting victims who’ve been lulled into a false sense of security. be the person you hate. bring back the dastardly link
someone actually studied the falling Rick Roll rate for their Ph.D dissertation recently and published the paper
okay but this made me wonder if there was actually any academic literature on rickrolling and YES THERE IS this is a paper about rickrolling WITHIN academic literature. As in, studies that attempt to rickroll the people reading them. Best part is no one is going to believe me and click that link even though it’s 100% true.
My friend's book is mentioned in this paper!!
There is no earthy way of convincing anyone that the rickroll study link is real. But for what it's worth. It is
I have a new goal in my almost-finished PhD dissertation.
Second link's good guys, truly
Teaboot's right, there is basically nothing on earth that could convince me to click the second link. I genuinely believe it might be real, but i'm not touching it.
Usually when I pick a fic to make into a book, it’s one I’ve already finished. But this time I was about two-thirds through Disjoint by @liesonthefloordramatically when I decided I wanted to make a book out of it! Including illustrations by @anticiajk to make this binding extra pretty :3
Extra pics and a lot of yapping below the cut
my actual vampire hot take is that if you're going to be a 'vegetarian' vampire (a vampire that only drinks the blood of animals) you MUST have hunter education. i'm so sick of people being like oh well predator animals are mean and scary because they kill cute 'harmless' animals like NO they're crucial for the environment and if you're going to hunt animals for blood you still need to stick to regular people hunting guidelines and only hunt things that are in season and abide by your areas bag limits
vampire that did a detailed study about whether vampires can get prion diseases and concluded they can't and preferentially hunts animals with chronic wasting disease. and then incinerates the corpses.
vampire who is a woke predation abolitionist and so exclusively hunts predators, leaving primarily herbivorous and scavenging animals alone
"For miles around the foul creature's lair is nothing but barren wastes"
"because of The Curse?"
"Because of the deer and rabbits, fucking thing ate all the wolves"
Oat milk was discovered much more recently than you may have known. Like many now-familiar technologies, it was found by accident during the Apollo program when NASA learned what a zero-g environment does to goat milk.

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
greg davies singing bossa nova about a bathroom may have actually changed me as a woman
May we all know decadence such as this
"godless beast" and it's literally Dionysus in animal form.
“godless beast” and it’s
literally Dionysus
in animal form.
Beep boop! I look for accidental haiku posts. Sometimes I mess up.
I just saw a comment on fb that ran off the misconception that dowries were a sexist subjugation of women for the purposes of buying and selling them like objects, and since this morning I would rather die than engage with a stranger on fb I'm going to talk on here instead about dowries as they were around Jane Austen's era/regency England.
Basically: dowries were an inheritance. It was a way to give a daughter what they would need to live comfortably at the time when they were most likely to need it - leaving their father's care and support and beginning a home elsewhere. In Austen terms we're generally talking about a sum of money, but dowries can also include items for a household like linens and China (goods like this were called a trousseau from at least the 1830s onward). Dowries very materially improved the life of a woman as they were meant to.
#dowries
You know how there's like some mathematician or something, who like did some useful stuff but is primarily known for overshadowing that work by going to great lengths trying to convince people to blow up the moon or something?
I wanna be like that but the hill I'm dying on is that the moon should be considered a planet
Stop tagging this about the Unabomber it's not about the Unabomber, it's about time we give the other fucked up mathematicians some recognition, it's about this fucking guy
OP you're right and you should say it. There are 9 planets in the solar system and two of them are in a binary planetary system. I will die on this hill.
EXACTLY. EARTH-MOON IS A BINARY PLANET SYSTEM. AND I WILL BECOME NOTABLE FOR MY FREQUENT POSTS TO VARIOUS TUMBLR BLOGS AND MY ADVOCACY FOR THE RECOGNITION OF THE MOON AS A PLANET.
Now, dear reader, you might say: "But three of the Jovian moons and Titan are bigger than the Moon!". And to that I say yes, but two of those are bigger than Mercury also and people aren't usually upset about that. Plus all of those are satellites of bodies that are completely incomparable in scale.
Ganymede, the biggest moon in the solar system, is 0.008% the mass of Jupiter. The Moon is a bit over 1.2% of Earth's mass and a solid 27% of its radius. There's no other planet* in the solar system with a satellite anywhere close to the kind of similarity in size that the Earth-Moon system has.
You might also say "Fine but it's literally called 'The Moon' so that's a bit silly". To which I say that I've been calling it that to be more easily understood but it would be extremely easy to switch to calling it "Luna" which is what most people do when they encounter situations where saying "The Moon" creates ambiguity - like when writing sci-fi or a nontrivial amount of astronomical research.
In conclusion, lumping Luna in with the satellites of other bodies is unhelpful because it is geophysically distinct from most of them, and orbitally distinct from all of them. Luna is a planet and it's rad that we can see one so clearly in the night sky.
[*No, Pluto is not a planet, but yes Pluto-Charon is totally a dwarf planet binary]
I'll integrate this into my belief system but only because it's funny
hello???? hello??????????? have we walked into the twilight zone or something??????????? yes, the moon is a percentage (a percentage almost exactly) of earth’s mass, but that doesn’t magically make us a binary system! the barycenter is still well within the diameter of earth! what next, are you going to say that since deimos and phobos orbit mars, they’re actually a trinary planetary system?? you fucking better not!
Hi, I'm an astrophysicist, I am well aware of the IAU (International Astronomical Union) definition of a planet. It is a definition that is relatively controversial and doesn't really make a lot of sense - it was mostly written to prevent the list of planets from getting too long as we discovered more dwarfs. This definition does not include anything to do with barycentres - I'll get back to that.
The IAU definition of a planet has 3 parts:
1. Object in orbit around our Sun
2. Object has reached hydrostatic equilibrium (i.e. it's a sphere, not a potato)
3. Object has cleared its neighborhood around its orbit
Both Earth and Luna satisfy 2. I will accept that 1 is debatable, but the crux of my argument is that Luna is the size of a terrestrial planet (yes, ~1% of Earth's mass, but still huge and of roughly the same order of magnitude as Mercury, which is a mere ~5% of Earth's mass) and exceptionally large relative to its orbital partner compared to any other "satellite", a factor the IAU does not account for.
It's important to note that 1 literally does not permit binary planets - even if both bodies are identical, one must be the "moon". This is major criticism of the IAU definition. It also doesn't account for exoplanets or rogue planets, but that's another story.
3 is where this definition falls apart. You could easily argue that most of the planets in our solar system fail depending on how you interpret it, because it's so fuzzy. The Earth fails, because there's a planet-sized body chilling out in its orbit (Luna), Jupiter fails because it has huge quantities of asteroids trapped in its Lagrange points, etc.
In the latter case, we say that because Jupiter is determining the motion of these bodies, it still counts. For the Earth we simply ignore Luna and say that the rule is more about stray bodies than orbital partners. But by the same logic we can say that for Luna we ignore the Earth, and Luna passes.
So I would argue that the IAU definition is bad, but if you fixed it so that it allowed binary systems to exist, it would readily define Luna as a planet in my view (if you deleted the Earth from the solar system and left Luna, it would unambiguously meet the criteria).
Now let's talk about barycentres.
The barycentre of two bodies in orbit is just their overall centre of mass. People often point to the external barycentre of the Pluto-Charon system to indicate that they are binary dwarfs. However, this is a poor metric in my view, because it's highly dependent on orbital distance.
The centre of mass of the Earth-Luna system is inside the Earth at present, but if Luna simply orbited further away, the barycentre would be in the empty space between them, with nothing about the two bodies individually, or the qualitative nature of their orbits, having changed. In fact, given enough time and pretending the Sun won't consume both bodies in a few billion years, Luna would actually drift far enough away due to tidal interactions for this to happen - it would be silly for it to suddenly be a planet one day when it wasn't the day before.
To answer your question, no. I would under no circumstances argue that the martian moons are planets. They are minuscule space potatoes that are not even large by the standards of asteroids. If Mars were close enough in mass to them for the system to be considered plausibly trinary, it would be far too small to even qualify as a dwarf planet (and there's no way such a system would be gravitationally stable to perturbation by Jupiter regardless).
@hereticalteapot Thank you so much for laying this all out! I totally agree. Something that's motivating to me is the fact that Luna is more gravitationally attracted to the Sun than to Earth- and by that definition is orbiting the Sun, not the Earth. This is not true of any other "moons" in our solar system except some which are not even large enough to become spheres- so this is another way in which it is different from the moons in our system.
It's really frustrating to me when people lash out and say "You're wrong because there's a definition, for the love of god look up the definition" about a topic where I think it's clear my point is that I KNOW the definition and I disagree with it. And that's allowed! Definitions are made up! "Planets" are made up, and I think we should make them up differently!
All the things in our solar system are just different kinds of rocks dancing to each other's gravity- they're all affected by each one's gravity, even in tiny ways. They do not fall neatly into subcategories "planet" and "not a planet" - we made this distinction up because we wanted it. We noticed that some of the bodies in our solar system seemed much more important and dominant than others and we wanted a name for that. But the planets don't know that- they don't have an inherent major distinction between them, nor are they obligated to. When we wanted to come up with a way to clearly decide which bodies were planets, we had to make something up.
What we made up is a little bit vague, and even if it were extremely clear cut, we could still debate whether it was a reasonable or intuitive or useful definition.
In science we have lots of definitions, and they aren't handed down by god, they're made by people, and they are made to be useful, and when they aren't useful or reasonable, they can be and should be and are changed. Knowing which things fit which definitions is part of science, but another part of science is thinking critically about whether things SHOULD be defined, how they should be defined, whether definitions need to be changed, and other things like this- and that's messier than just knowing facts. But that's science.
I hate to say it folks, but my fondness for the "Luna is a planet" argument might not just be because it's silly and I like to be silly. It might be a really convenient training ground for thinking about definitions which are social constructs in other contexts. Like race, sex, gender, disability, economics. These things, like planets, are made up. They are very real, don't get me wrong! They are real because we made them up! But what, exactly, they are... we decided it. And we could decide differently. We have that power. If you don't like something because it doesn't fit a definition- that's not really an argument against it. Because the definition could be changed. Should it be?
This is all great points and you're so right.
Also for any barycenter definition fans - the barycenter of Luna and Jupiter is within Jupiter. I think we can all agree Luna is not a moon of Jupiter.
Something else to note is that IAU bylaws require a new definition to be voted on to be circulating for at least a year in the scientific community. The one voted on in 2006 was drafted the same day. Also, the vote was specifically and carefully planned such that most of the planetary scientists who were only there for specific parts of the conference relevant to their fields had left already. It was rigged and in violation of their own bylaws, so I think its well past time we stop listening to this absurd definition.
What the absolute fuck I can't believe election rigging is part of this story lmfao
Alexander Abian blogging from the dead
Prev I would really like you to explain what you meant by some of this because I think I'm not aware of some physics you're referring to. But. On the other hand. I am SLIGHTLY afraid to ask.
i am Incapable of putting things into words in any reasonable manor so instead i have drawn a handy diagram
Well. I guess that helps.
anyway i looked up the post about seeing your grandma's boobs and tumblr has deleted the screenshot of the story where the finnish dude says that americans are "like that" because they haven't seen their grandma's tits
good job tumblr 👍
there it is!
my comments on that post were (sorry for shamelessly copy-pasting them):
american attitudes about nudity are fucking wild, and the worst part is that because they're american, they just assume that everyone everywhere thinks the same. i will never forget seeing people on a left-leaning, progressive site saying that families bathing together is creepy and gross and clearly a sign that something is wrong with the family, that they'd never seen their siblings or parents naked and would in fact rather die. meanwhile to this day i bathe and go to the sauna with my sister and mother and have been bathing and sauna'ing with various family members - and even strangers! - my whole life. but yes, can confirm, seeing your grandma's tits as a child does you good, and not just because it teaches you that "beauty is fake and temporary", but because it broadens your ideas about what beauty even is in the first place. my sister and i used to spend our summers at our grandma's house by the countryside and frequently bathed and went to sauna with her. we saw not just her breasts but also her flabby skin, her moles and liver spots, her body hair and varicose veins, and we didn't see any of that as weird or ugly because they were a part of our grandma who we loved very much. and when we see those things in other people - ourselves included! - we think "well it wasn't ugly on my grandma's body, so why would it be ugly on anyone else's body?". it makes you much more understanding and "forgiving", if you will, towards the completely normal bodies of strangers as well as your own body.

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
i love this guy
What's the fic you would write if you had the energy for it? Ambitious, complex, novel-length—the fanfic you'd make if you could.
I put all this in tags but I fucked one up and editing them is a nightmare so I'm just dumping it here.
Highlander.
The premise is that an evil immortal god was exiled by his pantheon by being broken into thousands of pieces and bound to random male infants scattered over space and time. The idea was that they would live normal mortal lives and kill him bit by bit as those lives ended, but he was too strong and each piece of him granted its bearer immortality in turn as well as a rush of his power when they kill another. His evil can easily taint a mortal and as one gains more and more of it you either succumb to his nature or bear the exhausting burden of being its living prison. How will it play out when there can be only one?
This premise also opens the story to interference and assistance from other gods of the pantheon as they begin to notice what is happening, as well as trans highlanders if the piece of the god was bound to a mortal male soul which was then born into a female or intersex body.
personally I DONT think Jane Austen intended for Mr. Bennet to be paying Mrs. Bennet a genuine compliment when he said she was as beautiful as any of their daughters. He seems kind of incapable of paying his wife a real compliment.
BUT
I still think we should have MILF Mrs. Bennet. I think everyone should be like “damn” when they see her and then she opens her mouth and they’re like “oh”. I want them to go through the same process Mr. Bennet did, in a much shorter time frame.
Cultural Insights of Our Own: Lessons From a Newly Decoded Digital Archive
Interplanetary Journal of Cultural Studies
Volume 16, Issue 3, Pages 322-340
Abstract
The recently decoded Internet Archive includes the digital artifact called “Archive of Our Own” (AO3) from early third millennium Earth. AO3 is unusually well backed up and therefore is presumed to contain some of the most significant -- perhaps even sacred -- texts of the time. In this paper we present our preliminary analysis of AO3 metadata, including new insights about the literature, gender and sexuality, religion, and scientific understanding of this historical era:
I. LITERATURE. We describe the cultural centrality of figures such as the Winchesters and Reader. We explore how they featured heavily in every dominant literature genre of the era, including Fluff, Angst, Hurt/Comfort, and Oral Sex.
II. GENDER AND SEXUALITY. We review the overwhelming evidence that male-male relationships were the most culturally significant sexual and romantic relationships, but we also show that it was a culture with an unusually broad set of sexual and gender roles. In particular, we highlight the unusual tripartite conceptualization of gender as including alpha, beta, and omega roles; we note the apparent prejudice against betas, illustrated in the prevalence of “no beta we die like men” and similar protest slogans.
III. RELIGION. We describe a newly discovered religious taboo: doves were a common sacrificial animal of the time, but they were forbidden from being eaten.
IV. SCIENCE. Finally, we present new insight about alternate universes. While previous scholars hypothesized that the scientists of Earth may have developed a correct early theory of the multiverse by the late second millennium, our analysis of AO3 presents evidence to the contrary. As late as the early third millennium, prevailing theories postulated highly specific universes, such as a universe in which everyone is in high school, or a universe contained within a coffee shop.
Taken together, these historical insights show that further investigation is warranted into the valuable documents stored within AO3, perhaps even going beyond the metadata to examine the full texts.
okay here's a poll
fanfic is for
shipping
torment nexus
no you don't get to say both or neither or a secret third thing. pick a side.

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
I feel like a certain someone would LOSE their shit to this
@mistycatt yoohooo
Relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/2609/
theres ALWAYS a relevant XKCD for everything huh
reminds me of how artists flip the canvas to make sure their art looks good
Just flip the genders real quick and check if you accidentally made a cult