/wanders in like ????
hello vonnie
cherry valley forever
Misplaced Lens Cap

i don't do bad sauce passes
Show & Tell

Love Begins

Product Placement

izzy's playlists!
wallacepolsom
Acquired Stardust

blake kathryn
almost home

Andulka

tannertan36
KIROKAZE

pixel skylines
ojovivo

Discoholic đŞŠ

if i look back, i am lost

seen from Singapore

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from India

seen from Malaysia
seen from Italy

seen from United Kingdom

seen from China
seen from Singapore
seen from Brazil
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from TĂźrkiye

seen from Malaysia

seen from Singapore

seen from TĂźrkiye
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
@omgjersey
/wanders in like ????

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
(via @Gr8ones_)
a shout out to all the people who started saying âsameâ as a joke once in awhile but now use it for the most random things like a car honking their horn at another car
good luck to linguistics in the future trying to explain this

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
no need to feel afraid, ben is keeping an eye on you đđŚ
thank you ben
so you see, humans evolved to be bipedal on account of how our ancestors transitioned from the forest environment to the savannah environment, and in the savannah environment bipedalism was more adaptive because it provides better thermoregulation and allows you to carry things, but most of all because bipedal locomotion is highly energy efficient and energy efficient locomotion would have been very strongly selected for on account of how time budgets are a limiting factor on home range which is a limiting factor on diet quality and breadth which is really quite important
my lecturers have been very clear and very insistent that bipedalism evolved first and then allowed tool use, tool use did not spur a transition to bipedalism, the fossil record is Clear On This Point
and what I do not understand is: if bipedalism is so completely wonderfully energy-efficient and optimal, why are there so few bipedal things? How come lions and gazelles and giraffes and buffalo arenât bipedal? Why arenât other savannah species selected for energy-efficient locomotion too?
I am sure there is a good explanation for this but my lecturers have still not provided it and I must know please god just somebody explain this to me or I will die of curiosity
Reasons Why We Have Bipedal Apes, But Not Bipedal Lions, According To My Biological Anthropology Supervisor:
You know when creationists talk about how an eye couldnât possibly evolve gradually, because half an eye is useless and a waste of resources and worse than no eye at all?
Theyâre wrong about eyes; a single photoreceptor cell (usually just an evolutionary âtweakâ away from a regular epidermal cell with biochemistry that happened to be photosensitive) is actually useful and great, and more is better. If you imagine breaking a modern wing in half and attaching it to a bird, âhalf a wing is uselessâ sounds true, but it stops sounding true when you realise that halfway to a wing doesnât look like a modern bird wing but broken in half, it looks like a slightly enlarged membrane between a limb and your body that gives you just an extra half second of glide time when you jump.
But there *are* adaptations in this class of things, where itâs great if you have full-blown X but shitty to have half-baked X. As you might imagine, they are quite rare, because as the creationists correctly observe, if half-X is maladaptive there is no path to arrive at X through gradual adaptation to an environment. And yet bipedalism is of this class. How?
Well, you wanna know what it looks like to have enough bipedal foot structure that you decide to go adventuring around in the savannah on two feet, but you havenât got the pelvic structure to make it efficient yet? YOU CANâT RUN. You are literally incapable of moving faster than a kind of slow awkward lope. Your back kills all the time because your bones are all pointed the wrong way and your back muscles are trying to keep you upright. Your ankle and leg bones take far more pounding than they were ever optimised before and occasionally shatter. Youâre unbalanced and ungainly and frankly sort of pathetic, and at very high risk from predators (to repeat: RUN AWAY IS NOT AN AVAILABLE STRATEGY).
Why would anything go through a long gradual process of getting much shittier and then eventually getting better, since evolution canât plan or foresee? WRONG QUESTION. Whoever told you evolution was a slow gradual constant drift was a dirty rotten liar, just like all your other teachers from when you were twelve. More commonly, evolution involves long periods of relative stability where the organism is pretty much as adapted to its niche as itâs going to get, and then something changes and thereâs a very rapid response. Or it involves successful populations dispersing widely over a landscape, then becoming distinct reproducing populations which lost genetic contact with each other and diverging, and then thereâs an environmental change and they reconnect and sometimes they happily interbreed and sometimes one of the divergent branches drives the others extinct and disperses itself widely and rinse and repeat.
What happened was, basically:
Hi weâre early hominins and we just love hanging around in trees and weâre proud to say weâve been hanging around in trees now for a couple million years and we havenât changed a bit, slightly bigger skulls aside, weâre basically just per- what the fuck? WHAT THE FUCK? WHERE DID THE TREES GO?? WHY IS IT SUDDENLY SO DRY???? oh my God I can see nothing but grass and I am having to walk around on my hind legs all the FUCKING time and FUCK FUCK FUCK THATâS A LION FUCK PANIC RED ALERT oh okay weâre bipedal now I guess, that was quick, oh well, all fine, carry on
Somehow we survived when a change in environment pushed us into a new ecological niche. The selection pressure was strong enough to make us acquire a really quite extensive range of mods to make bipedalism work, but not strong enough to make us dead.
Of course, âstrong pressure to adapt somehowâ doesnât necessarily mean âstrong pressure to adapt in this specific way we know is really goodâ. Early hominins who lived before the forest shrinkage have been shown to have a few bipedal adaptations. We werenât sure what the hell they were doing with them, so we looked at chimps. Turns out chimps display short-distance carrying behavior - as in, picking up an object and carrying it. They donât carry tools and canât move far bipedally, but what they do do is pick up a valuable resource like a choice bit of prey and haul it off with them, away from the group of moneys fighting over the rest of the prey. So before the forests collapsed, there was a mild selection pressure to be able to use only your hind legs for a short stretch so that you could carry something in your arms, and when they collapsed, individuals good at that behavior were better at surviving the savannah and evolution just slammed its foot on the gas pedal until you get obligate bipeds.
So, a species that wasnât forced into a rapid niche change like that, wouldnât evolve an initially-painful thing like bipedalism. What about all the other species that made the same change as the same time as us? Eh, many went extinct, that happens a lot with ecological change, but the ones who survived didnât do bipedalism.
Points to those who said it was about evolution having different starting points to build on, y'all were correct. No matter how awesome and efficient and optimal bipedalism is, evolution only cares about whether the next tiny step in some random direction increases or decreases how many offspring are produced. Evolution âlooksâ for the NEAREST solution that counts as a solution, not the best solution.
For a species of monkeys that were forced to spend less time in the forest and range wider and already had some variable locomotion abilities, evolution went for bipedalism. Bipedalism may have enabled the future awesomeness of humans with its efficiency and head stability and what have you, but evolution made it happen just because it was the local maxima - its awesomeness is a lucky side effect.
But where monkeys used short bursts of bipedal movements to carry things, another species might use something more convenient for them - say, a lion might pick up and carry things in its mouth, and if there was a selection pressure to be better at carrying the lions might end up with bigger mouths, but âbecome bipedalâ is very unlikely because half bipedal is worse than no bipedal at all.
Basically, monkeys had the preconditions for bipedalism, nothing else did. (Note that this does not make monkeys special - the ancestor of any species with an unusual adaptation, from giraffesâ long necks to penguinsâ Arctic-water-proofing feathers, was a thing that had the preconditions for that adaptation when nothing else did.)
Bipedalism didnât happen because it was awesome, it became awesome because the range of adaptations it supports turned out to be a package that turned into, well, us.
âŚNotice that we are not actually the only bipedal species. Notice what they mean when they say things like, âBipedalism leads to the ability to carry things leads to tool use leads to bigger brainsâ. On a naive reading, it means âbipedalism is a part of the tech tree and once youâve bought it you can get hands optimised for holding toolsâ, and if it says this then you are right to be confused as to why perfectly good bipedal emus do not also have spears and control of fire.
When you realise that evolutionary studies is so full of ridiculously many caveats and preconditions that lecturers just omit them and assume you know theyâre there, you start interpreting what they say more like, âIn a species that already dabbled in just a tiny bit of bipedalism, bipedalism was the only way to go when the niche changed, it was way better for the new niche then the old way of locomotion, and given the likely presence of some proto-tool-like behaviors like throwing rocks or poking things with sticks, it created an adaptive opportunity to better fit this particular environment by improving on the tool behaviours using the new physiological advantages.â
Also god I learned a lot in that hour. Why does time spent *not* talking to biological anthropologists have to be a thing? Talking to biological anthropologists is the BEST.
Epistemic status: my recollection of a conversation an hour ago between me and an academic in this field, any misunderstandings are because Iâm an undergrad who didnât get what he was trying to say.
THIS IS SO COOL
(Why do I not live on a university campus D:)
SO YES and also, Iâm going to pull out my Vaclav Smil* for a second here.
Human locomotion is not particularly energy efficient! It takes us more energy to walk or run than it does for most mammalian quadrupeds, but our energy use curves look pretty different from theirs.Â
If a horse goes for a trot, its trot (like all its gaits) has a U-shaped energy curve. It costs more to trot at slower speeds, goes down to a most-efficient pace, and then comes back up. At a certain point, it crosses over the energy curve for the horseâs next gait, and the horse will (left to its own devices) start to canter or gallop.
Human WALKING has a U-shaped curve like that, but human RUNNING does not, and that is damned strange for a mammal. Our friend Smil says: âthe energetic cost of human running is relatively high, but humans are unique in virtually uncoupling this cost from speedâ. That particular aspect of things is a direct side-effect of bipedalism: we can vary our breathing in ways that quadrupedal animals (who have supporting legs all attached to their breathing apparatus) cannot. Basically, we are the evolutionary equivalent of cartoon characters who can spin their legs really fast. So we arenât as efficient at running as a horse who is going at its optimum pace, but we can speed up and slow down and it wonât cost us much, which is not true of the horse.
Not incidentally, this is why many humans practiced (or still practice) persistence hunting. If you are less efficient than that delicious antelope, but you can make it run at its least-efficient panic speed while you trundle along at a nice constant rate, you can exhaust it. Â
* Smil, Vaclav (2007-12-21). Energy in Nature and Society: General Energetics of Complex Systems (MIT Press). The MIT Press. Kindle Edition.Â
Iâm so glad OP came back and corrected themselves, I was sitting on my hands reading the first part! Omg those lecturers. I mean theyâre getting minimum wage but still. Bless their hearts.
The lecturers conflated tool use and tool making. Tool USE is observed throughout the animal kingdom. Tool MAKING is said to be primate-specific (we ignore corvids in this scenario.) note that this isnât hominid-specific, though. Tool MAKING is not a function of bipedalism; itâs a function of having your hands free. These are two very different things. Now, itâs certainly true that tool MAKING - in the form of shaped bones, flints and stones - postdates bipedalism in the fossil record, but we must note
1. A shaped blade of grass or a shaped branch counts as a tool, and does not reliably fossilise; 2. Behaviour is notoriously bad at fossilising; 3. Scientists must acknowledge the biases of the fossil record in geology and paleontology, so donât think that anthropologists are going to be allowed to get away with it.
So tool-making, like bipedalism, is something that popped up occasionally in our lineage and is still practiced by our living relatives. It became fixed in our lineage, and is distinctive to hominids, but it was not dropped on us by the Hand of God. Very very few things are.
We also note that birds are bipedal, and are something of the original biped. We are kind of hipsters in that sense. (BEHOLD! THE MAN!)
But, you see, birds generally donât have HANDS.
When youâre looking at something like bipedalism and asking yourself âwhat does this say about humans?â Then look at other animals, and see what theyâre doing. And then come at it from a different angle. sometimes the answer isnât the feet. Sometimes itâs the hands.
This is fascinating, but Iâve gotta admit that my major takeaway from it is that humans have bipedalism ultimately because it was adaptive for tree-dwelling proto-hominids to be able to pick stuff up and run off with it, presumably whooping like Dr. Zoidberg all the while.
iâm so glad persistence hunting came up. because that, to me, is the really interesting synergy between big brains and bipedalism.
carrying tools is nbd, modern chimps make and stash some wacky shit and have been known to wear a favorite termite stick behind their ear to keep it. a clever tool guy is going to find a way to do the clever tool thing no matter how comfortable it is for him to stand up.
but you combine that big brain with the slow but efficient swing gait of a walking human, and what you get is a predator who can mosey ominously after you until you just drop dead.
there is literally no animal on earth that can out-stubborn a human. and even a pretty average human with no special training can walk hours without dipping into their long-term energy reserves or experiencing significant fatigue. an experienced hunting team in peak health? theyâll go a week. nothing can survive that. hell, i recall myself as a 12-year-old kid, just some suburban rando who played a few team sports, and my dad the office worker with the weekend martial arts habit, easily separating, directing, and following a full-grown buck across maybe 20 miles of boreal forest, deliberately passing up several good opportunities for kill shots in favor of herding it closer to where we left the car. that wasnât the heroic effort of a whole tribe, that was a fun weekend for a couple joes with one decent bow between them. for early humans, organizing a perfect hunt was no doubt as fun and interesting as sports are to us now, and more invigorating than exhausting.
a hunting wolf, on the other hand, will drop a chase after a mile or so. just. welp. nevermind.
one mile.
so whichever evolved first, once you had âmoseyâ capability combined with âconcept of day after tomorrow and where i left my stuff yesterday morningâ, human survivability in every environment went through the roof.
Every time you are tempted to react in the same old way, ask yourself if you want to be a prisoner of the past or a pioneer of the future.
Deepak Chopra (via onlinecounsellingcollege)
shiba icons! ⥠like or reblog if saving

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
Look what my sister got me!! :DD
i never realised that The Babadook was accidentally put in the LGBT+ movies section of Netflix i thought we all just collectively decided the babadook was gay for no reason at all
you are not your bad days. you are not who they couldnât love. you are the light and triumph, you are learning and growing and your are your own hallelujah. you are the good days and you are the earth. you are blooming and becoming and each day is so special and so are you.Â
So I recently read an article about how the big thing in child-rearing in the 1980s was self-esteem; the thought was that creating good self-esteem in kids seemed linked to higher achievement, so there was a huge emphasis in the 80s and 90s, continuing into today, to build self-esteem in kids (we are now finding this is correlation but not causation, per the article). And it occurs to me that a lot of the shit Millennials get is the result of good self-esteem. I know we all hate ourselves and this seems like bullshit, just, bear with me.
This occurred to me because I was thinking about how colas are advertised now versus how they were advertised in my childhood in the 80s â now thereâs stuff like the emojis on Pepsi bottles and the names on Coke bottles, whereas when I was a kid the big thing was athletes and movie stars drinking cola. And they were marketed in that way in the 80s because the idea was âYou could be as cool as this dude if you drank Coca Cola.âÂ
This marketing doesnât work on the younger generation, because we donât give a fuck about being as cool as That Dude. Because we were raised with this weird emphasis on self-esteem. Boomer style marketing doesnât work on Millennials (or on a significant portion of GenX) because Millennials canât be courted by the idea that consuming something will change their self image or their image in other peoplesâ eyes. I mean yeah weâre all broke, but we understand that buying something wonât make us feel less broke. The idea of âTreat Yo Selfâ works because itâs based on the idea of buying something that will give you pleasure rather than status. We donât need status. We make our own, or we find it irrelevant. Because: self-esteem. (Older generations tend to mistake this for self-absorption, because they donât have it and thus believe it cannot be a virtue.)
BUT SAM, THEN WHY DO I HAVE SUCH ANXIETY? you ask. WHY AM I SO OBSESSED WITH MY FAILINGS?
Well, because you are conscious of them in a way that previous generations arenât. Youâre aware of your self-esteem issues because self-esteem as a concept is so familiar to you. Someone raised without that emphasis on self-esteem in schools and childhood media buys a status-maker because theyâre not aware thatâs what theyâre doing. Itâs an unconscious connection. They donât understand why they feel inadequate, so they can only turn to the media to guide them towards a feeling of adequacy. Millennials know why they feel inadequate, and they know buying something wonât solve that.Â
Buying something may bring pleasure, but we know it wonât bring a permanent solution to our feelings of inner turmoil, and so our spending habits are radically different and our interaction with advertising is conditional in a way our parentsâ isnât. We want it proven that whatâs being sold to us will either solve a real problem or bring a real pleasure, and if you canât do either of those things, go fuck yourself. Because we have self-esteem.Â
Of course also weâre broke. But that didnât stop previous generations, who just invented the credit card and kept going.Â
This is all just a theory, but it feels sound. That said, Iâm open to information that supports or contradicts. I honestly donât interact much with television advertising, so perhaps my view is skewed.Â
And then the real problem with the self-esteem movement was that it was based on praise, and the idea that you must be praiseworthy and wonderful 24/7, which isnât actually possible. Itâs a whole thing.
Also,  you know: the whole âwhat coin do I put in the machine to get The Best Child out the other end?â thing, which Iâve ranted about before but am too tired to go find. Which is to say: a lot of the work that discovered that poor self esteem fucked people over, and that restoring self esteem* could help fix it was done by very dedicated and well-educated people, working hard with specific patients or groups of patients, in controlled environments, adapting their techniques to the situations they encountered. It was bespoke work. It was the equivalent of getting a dress perfectly tailored to you.Â
In the movement it was then applied sloppily, without consideration, on a mass-production scale, in a one-size-doesnât-fit-anyone mentality. Like a machine spitting out smocks that are all size 9 but made with lycra so in theory they can SORT OF stretch to actually be on any body but oh god there are like maybe 15% of humans in the middle that actually look good and are comfortable, and maybe 30% of humans around that 15% who can more or less get by and fuck everyone else.Â
It was treated as âah, praise = self-esteem = the coin I can put in the machine to get a High Achieving, Well-Balanced Child.â And everyone went YAY! and went about their business.Â
And it fucked us up. Bad.Â
One of the things Iâm very firm on is I donât lie. Iâve taught music, and Iâve had a bunch of other situations, and if something went wrong Iâm gonna absolutely acknowledge it. I am also going to go âokay no, youâre right. That scale wasnât as good as the scales you heard Georgina practicing while you were waiting for your lesson. Georgina is two years older than you, and started music when she was 5. This is not an appropriate benchmark to set for yourself, and also, you can BE GOOD ENOUGH without having to compete with Georgina. When I just told you âthat was greatâ, I meant âyou have improved significantly and by the measures that we talked about last class, which were evenness of rhythm and legato connection, that improvement is in fact greatâ.âÂ
I break it down to that. Which has been an important part of working through this stuff.Â
*someone is going to niggle in with âbut it shouldnât be self-esteem, it should be self respect!â or âself worth!â or whatever, but like guys: this is rearranging deck furniture on the Titanic. The concept we are looking for here is ânot thinking that you are worthless garbage, and thinking that you are capable of success and good things and this is okayâ. What exact word we use for it is much less important here.Â

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
cats opening doors with their faces is astounding. you got four paws little fool.