the more i talk w/ leftist friends the more i start to realize that they think culture is only defined by food or "traditional" (i.e. "ethnic") garb and nothing else
mentioned how white americans do in fact have a common culture and they genuinely thought i was joking. culture isnt something only granted to the Cool People of Color. just feels like among progressive groups there's this dichotomy created in which only the virtuous oppressed minorities have culture and anyone who is privileged some sort of void cultureless being
When I visited Chicago, the very first thing to weird me out from the airport was… how almost everywhere had revolving doors.
I’m Australian. Sure, we do have those doors, but the vast majority of places in Sydney are automatic sliding doors or old-fashioned manual push/pulls because we don’t need to block out the cold and wind the same way here.
So every day I experienced a culture clash with something as basic as what doors were normal for me.
Americans who say they don’t have a culture are plagued with defaultism beyond belief. Culture isn’t just made up of costumes and language and the largest stuff, it’s constructed of a billion small things you do every day that you never even consider could be different because that’s just “normal” to your daily life. No one has no culture just because they’re not adhering to the biggest markers they can consciously recognise.
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.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
I don't know who needs to hear this, but getting married - like, just in general, to anyone at all - isn't inherently an achievement. It's not even inherently a good thing. It can be, but it can also be the worst choice you've ever made in your life. It's like getting a tattoo. You're allowed to do that as soon as you're 18, but if you don't know for sure what you want or if you even want one at all, you're better off not going through with it. Sure, people congratulate you just the same whether you're happy or not, but you can tell the difference on whether you're happy or not.
You wouldn't get a big, shitty tattoo that you hate just because all your friends already had one by the time they were 21. You shouldn't get married to the first guy who kind of tolerates you for the same sort of reasons. Don't let yourself get peer pressured into making choices your children will never forgive you for.
I always think of the description I saw years ago: Self-imposed deadlines don't help me, because I know the person who set them, and they're full of shit.
Give yourself the treat before you start. I'm serious. And ideally during the task and afterwards too.
Executive dysfunction comes from a lack of available dopamine. Common advice is wrong. You need to provide your own dopamine before you can start. Otherwise you're trying to run your car on empty.
"But what if I still don't do it" well you already weren't getting it done anyway. Now you have a little treat. Try again later.
You deserve kindness and care even when you aren't being productive.
(Also read How to Keep House While Drowning by KC Davis)
I give my students a LOT of techniques for starting writing when it feels overwhelming or daunting, but one of them is exactly this: dopamine load BEFOREHAND. It may sound weird to people on tumblr dot com, but a lot of people seriously struggle with executive dysfunction when it comes to writing literally anything, to the extent that it can cause such symptoms as panic, depression, and AI chatbot use.
I usually suggest this technique as a "Reverse Pomodoro." In the original Pomodoro, you work for 25 minutes and then take a break for 5 minutes (the times vary, but that's the essential ratio). People with executive dysfunction often find this insurmountable, and they get even more frustrated, and then the task seems even more difficult. So instead, flip those times.
FIRST, spend 25 minutes doing something energizing and engaging that you like to do. Not scrolling social media passively, not watching tv, not napping. Try something like colouring, doing yoga, running/walking around the block, talking about your favourite tv show with someone in real time, playing with the dog or cat, making and eating a lovely sandwich, hula hooping, something active. Having a little treat absolutely falls in this category!
(on the subject of little treats: refusing yourself food until you do work is for fucking Puritans and you can be kinder to yourself)
Then, after 25 minutes (or however long it takes to eat the sandwich or finish the yoga routine, it doesn't have to be exact), spend 5 minutes writing (or doing whatever you're struggling to start). Most people can coax themselves into doing something they find difficult for five minutes, if they have already filled up the joy/energy/engagement bucket. You can put a timer on for the 5 minutes if you want, or if you find that annoying, just work for as long as you like.
The other key is: don't push yourself to keep going when you're frustrated or tired—that will just reinforce the negative belief that you already have, which tells you that this task is painful to do, and needs to be avoided. If you've commonly had to force yourself to do this kind of task, that's likely part of why you think of it as painful and have trouble starting it now. Also, you should just, at a basic level, try not to put yourself in pain for the sake of productivity. So just do it till the good feelings run out. Then start hula hooping or colouring again for another 25 minutes. When the tank's refilled, try another 5 minutes of work, if you can. Adjust times to taste.
Not every technique works for everyone, but I've seen this one work for many students who are genuinely and seriously disabled by executive dysfunction. And many people find themselves getting more and more excited and engaged in the "difficult" task—because the good feelings from the hula hooping carry over, and because they're suddenly able to do the task without feeling pain, and feel accomplishment without feeling pain.
quarterly reminder that if i reblog something ai-generated it is 110% and always an accident and for the love of god please tell me so i can delete it from my blog
listen if the little mermaid 2023 did anything right it was ariel and eric... they were already a good couple in the original but fleshing him out and making him drawn to the ocean in a parallel to ariel being drawn to land is so good. and kind of increasing that human vs merfolk tension to make it this romeo & juliet love story. like sorry they kind of slayed there. eric sees ariel turn back into a mermaid in front of him and all he does is hold her tighter. they're both gigantic nerds. he's a foot taller than her. it's incredible.
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.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
I don't think Tolkien is a good fantasy writer because he scored the highest at some objective Best Fantasy Book Test that every fantasy writer has to take, I think he's a good fantasy writer because he created a world based on things that he was interested in. I feel like a lot of fantasy writers think that they need to create a whole language for their world because Tolkien did and obviously his books are the best so they have to emulate him, but Tolkien did that because he was a linguistics nerd. I think the lesson to be learned from him is not that you have to include elves and deep history and new languages, but that you have to write endlessly about the things you are a huge nerd about and use those things to create your fantasy world
Book Aragorn is one of the weirdest dudes in existence.
Nowhere is this more evident to me than when they are going through Moria, and Gandalf pauses a long time at a fork in the road trying to decide which way to go. Sensing the growing anxiety among the fellowship as Gandalf keeps lingering there, Aragorn says: “Do not be afraid! Gandalf has led us here against our fears, but he will lead us out again, at whatever cost to himself. He is surer of finding the way home in a blind night than the cats of Queen Beruthiel.”
Okay, buddy, let’s break that down:
1. Beruthiel is a long-dead queen of Gondor, hated for her cruelty and for her Cat Spy Network. Her husband eventually exiled her AND THE CATS out to sea. Her name was struck from The Book of Kings, but her legend lived on! How could it not.
2. Aside from Aragorn himself, only Gandalf (who is not listening) and Boromir will understand this reference. And I can’t help but feel it’s going to make Boromir immediately suspicious. Why is Aragorn referencing this deep cut of Gondorian history?
3. EVERY OTHER member of the fellowship had to be standing there like, “…Cats?”
I don’t know, Aragorn, I don’t think “don’t worry, Gandalf is better at navigation than Evil Cats” is the rousing speech you think it is.
The way Aragorn says it makes it seem like a normal saying in Middle-earth. It's possible that almost everyone present may be expected to know this means Gandalf is really good at finding his way around even if they don't know where the saying originated or who Queen Beruthiel actually was
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.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Ok but Zuko using the knowledge he acquired during his banishment to help him as the Fire Lord. Like making small talk with Earth Kingdom dignitaries about their local foods that he enjoyed and even misses. Like having in-depth conversations with his captains about sea currents and navigation. Like, in the middle of a meeting with several high-ranking naval officials, pointing out flails in security, like how a person can cling to a Fire Nation ship for hours at a time, or climb aboard using hatches on the upper decks, or disguise themselves as a lower ranking guard with easily accessible spare armour….
Though none of his experiences can prepare Zuko for the long, awkward silence that comes after he admits to doing or at least knowing something illegal and/or completely buck wild
Advisors: Princess Azula did perform the astounding feat of infiltrating Ba Sing Se…
Zuko: Huh? Oh, that’s not hard. It’s pretty nice, if you don’t mind the brainwashing, but you can’t get a spicy octopus for love or money. We ate so much jook. *shudders*
Advisors:… you got in too…. interesting.
*
Advisors: The mysterious Water Tribe city at the North Pole
Zuko: It’s a pretty place, if you like ice. Lots of sealturtles. They have a really nice little sort of sacred grove thing there, too, I kidnapped the Avatar from it once.
Advisors: …. we have some questions….
*
Advisors: We still have not found the Fire Lord’s secret supplier of new weapons -
Zuko: He’s at the Northern Air Temple. (Realizing they’re all staring at him) Oh, no, I haven’t met him personally, but I have friends who have. He sounds like a very interesting guy.
Advisors: SO MANY QUESTIONS
*
Zuko: (while directing post-war reparation efforts) Oh, and we need to send a lot of people to work on replanting the forest around this obscure village.
Advisors:…. may we ask why?
Zuko: Apparently the local panda spirit is pretty mad about having its forest burned down.
Advisors, now afraid to ask: ….Yes, Fire Lord.
*
Every now and then, the curiosity gets too much and they’ll bring up something like ‘legendary sand benders’ or ‘Southern Islands’ and Zuko invariably produces some tidbit of local knowledge (either his own or gleaned from the Gaang’s stories) and six Foreign Ministers have resigned in fear and the seventh one only barely held it together when Zuko greeted an envoy from a tiny, insignificant Earth Kingdom island with ‘Listen, I am really sorry about what happened last time, I hope the supplies I sent helped with the rebuilding, do you still have that giant eel thing?” IS THERE ANYTHING HE DOESN’T KNOW.
Adviser: “There still has been no word about the whereabouts of the vigilante known as the Blue Spirit. The last reported sighting was in Ba Sing Se. It is imperative we find more information about him.”
Zuko: “Oh you’re still looking into that?”
Adviser: “He is a wanted criminal in both the Earth Kingdom and Fire Nation for espionage, theft, assault and battery, breaking and entering and breaking numerous other local laws and customs.”
Zuko: “Huh when you put it like that it does sound pretty bad.”
Adviser: “My Lord, surly you heard of him and his crimes.”
Zuko: “Of course I heard of him. Its just… I mean considering all the good he did. His heart was in the right place?”
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.
Some of the ways they did this were actually before marriage. We tend to call every inheritance a woman was to receive a dowry but that's incorrect, most of Austen's heroines don't have a dowry, though we know how much they'll inherit upon the death of their father and/or mother. Fortune =/= dowry. The Bennets of Pride and Prejudice, the Dashwoods of Sense and Sensibility, Anne Elliot in Persuasion, and even Emma Woodhouse in Emma all will inherit a little to a great deal of wealth but not as a dowry. This means that even Emma, who will one day have the staggering amount of thirty thousand pounds, would not be bringing wealth immediately into a marriage (though in her circumstances she has a father who would hardly let her live impoverished if she had chosen to marry a penniless man).
For women as poor as the Bennets in Pride and Prejudice (though they should've had more money each, if their parents weren't useless, as has been discussed) the distinction between dowry and eventual inheritance didn't mean much: a max of fifty pounds per annum in interest was literally less than what some servants were paid so couldn't alleviate the need for their husbands to have an independent income. But what money a woman could bring into a marriage definitely increased the likelihood of her preferences being realised. Northanger Abbey's Catherine Moreland, who "would have three thousand pounds" means she has enough of a fortune to "smooth the descent of [General Tilney's] pride" and make him consent to the marriage of his son to her. She certainly would've been glad her parents saved this money for her, instead of feeling that she was an object being bought or sold. It empowered her choices, rather than reduced them.
That the inheritance of a woman is presented as a dowry also reduces the chances a woman and the man she loves will need to wait to marry until either of them inherit something or he makes a living. If Anne Elliot of Persuasion had had a dowry, instead of a future inheritance (a "share of ten thousand pounds which must be hers hereafter"), would she have broken off that original engagement? In ch23 she tells Captain Wentworth she would've been engaged to him when he had only "a few thousand pounds" and the likelihood of more thanks to an advantageous posting. If she would receive her own few thousand pounds upon marriage would that've been enough to remain engaged from the first, and perhaps even marry once he had added a few more thousands to that instead of needing to wait for Wentworth to build their shared fortune himself?
We can also see that a dowry was an inheritance parents provided for their daughter's benefit, rather than a sale price, by how carefully marriage articles were drawn up. This could legally define pin-money (how much money a woman would receive for her private usage and upkeep from her husband), and often specified that the husband couldn't diminish the bulk sum of his wife's fortune, only use the interest it generated, so that there would always be something to support the wife and her children no matter how spendthrift he was. Think of it like an old-fashioned pre-nup or family trust.
This is a huge reason why eloping was so bad, it meant there hadn't been articles drawn up beforehand and so the legal default of 'everything the wife has is now the husband's in full' applied instead of the chance to preserve her rights to her own fortune. If Wickham had succeeded in eloping with Georgiana Darcy in Pride and Prejudice her thirty thousand pounds would've become his in full when she turned twenty-one, though her guardians could've withheld it before then, and he could've spent it all and left her penniless without legal consequence.
There are plenty of historical examples of husbands without the regulations of marriage articles squandering the fortune and selling off assets, leaving the wife eventually destitute. Marriage articles are a response to that as father's wanted to protect their daughters and her future children. It actually limited the power of a husband in favour of preserving the comforts and rights of his wife, so was opposite of misogyny (though the society and laws which required these extra protections was undeniably sexist and male-centred)
Nor was receiving an inheritance upon marriage a specifically female-only practice. Eldest sons would generally receive the bulk of their inheritance when their father died, but it was common in this time and for centuries beforehand for them to be confirmed as heir or given a set income from their father (or one of their father's lesser estates, if we're talking nobility and the ultra rich) as part of the marriage articles (which would generally benefit the wife for the remainder of her life, either as a jointure or dower). Younger sons, if not already provided for, could also be given something upon their marriage and may have a commission in the army or a church living bought for them, to give them some independence. In Sense and Sensibility, after accepting the engagement of Edward and Elinor, Mrs Ferrars gives her son ten thousand pounds "towards augmenting their income" and this allows the marriage to occur. No one accuses Mrs Ferrars of selling Edward off in matrimony, even though what she's doing is so similar to a dowry that the narration points out it's exactly what "had been given with [her daughter] Fanny".
Fortune hunters and those marrying purely for money and a comfortable lifestyle definitely existed, as they do now, but dowries were not a socially and legally mandated way to give women to men to benefit them financially. 'Mercenary' marriages were frowned upon, and women were taught to look out for fortune hunters (like Wickham). Nor was it considered only men who might marry primarily to benefit from their spouse's wealth (Charlotte Lucas being a sympathetic female example). That both men and women could have inheritances gifted upon marriage, and were represented as seeking to marry for money, helps show that the practice of dowries wasn't a sexist practice which reduces women to little more than livestock.
In fact, there's an argument to be made that the very existence of large dowries being a cultural norm indicates that daughters were valued and loved. Instead of leaving everything they could to the sons (which would be expected if daughters were worthless objects to be given away at any price) these daughters were considered worth saving for, worth drawing up legal contracts to protect the living standard of, and worth leaving an inheritance often equal or greater than what younger sons would receive (as they could earn their own income). A dowry didn't reduce the humanity of a woman, it empowered her choices and protected her future. It was the women without dowries or an inheritance that were in danger of needing to marry whomever would take them.
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.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
ID: A youtube comment with 11 likes by Niceone, it says "I've lived 46 years without knowing this. How nice of life to save some of the best bites for later." End ID.
Normally, people tend to get frustrated, even jokingly, if they miss out on something. This comment was on a song from 1974 and it made me smile quite much. Simply appreciative. Like a dessert after dinner.
It is genuinely mind blowing to me just how many Tumblr posts have changed my life for the better and taught me to be happier. Not all of the thoughts originate on Tumblr, but the way people collect and frame them has literally changed my brain chemistry.
