
shark vs the universe
dirt enthusiast
YOU ARE THE REASON

romaâ

blake kathryn
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
we're not kids anymore.
Stranger Things
h
Three Goblin Art

â
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"

Cosmic Funnies
Jules of Nature

Product Placement

oozey mess
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
$LAYYYTER
ojovivo

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States

seen from Germany

seen from Austria

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

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from T1

seen from Japan
seen from Puerto Rico
seen from Bangladesh
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from TĂźrkiye
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Italy
@polterbeist

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
Theory on why Tofu hates Markiplier
If you are unfamiliar with Tofu, please read this post or watch this playlist about the snake who hates Markiplier. tl;dr- under the Markiplier gif.
From the videos you can see she tries to figure out what is upsetting Tofu, and found that it's not just streamers, or just his voice, or the stream. This specific snake
He does not like Markiplier specifically which is demonstrated by him squaring up with Mark, striking, and tail buzzing at him. He recognizes Mark specifically as a scary threat.
Animals have been shown to recognize human faces, and Tofu's reaction to Markiplier's face (and only his face as shown by the printout) is strong evidence that he recognizes Mark's face and differentiates him from other faces. With crows, they've been shown to hold grudges and have that grudge extend to other crows.
So Tofu has a negative association with Mark, and specifically Mark. The question is why? My theory is: perceived threat after a perceived dangerous situation. Some have theorized Tofu was mistreated by someone who looked like Mark- if they were while in his keeper's care she'd know. If it was his breeder, he'd more likely be afraid of all humans and need to first get over this negative perception (basing this on how Sakura reacted with massive trauma that took years for her to overcome, and to this day she's still jumpy. A breeder doesn't socialize their snakes so they'd only know humans to be abusive before being adopted, and his current keeper would very much notice that terrified trauma behavior to herself.)
One thing important to know about snakes is they are not only capable of learning from each other, but are protective of each other. I've seen this with my girls interacting with each other (yes snakes have friends and remember their family), learning from watching the other and copying her actions, as well as behavior I've observed on the Rattlecam with wild snakes. Adult snakes teach younger snakes, as well as are protective of them- even if they aren't their own babies. A female was shown on the rattlecam watching over a group of slitherlings that were obviously not her offspring as she was heavily pregnant. IIRC that same female ushered babies to safety after a hawk attack before worrying about her own safety. I've seen it in person as well with my girls, who have shielded each other from perceived danger, and scoria also squared up to something scary in the hall as though she were protecting me. And when it left she immediately went back to being relaxed and cuddly and happy. Snakes have friends that are snakes. It's an outdated belief snakes cannot bond with their keepers, as many do and seek them out for attention. These observations of snake behavior are part of what play into my theory basis.
So what could Mark himself have done? If you watch streamers you'll know Markiplier is known for playing jumpscare games with his FNAF let's plays being some of his most well known. Tofu's owner knows Markiplier, and is actively watching Markiplier with Tofu. More than likely she regularly watches Mark, has watched jumpscare videos, and had Tofu around while doing this.
It's a reasonable assumption. And if Tofu's keeper reacts to Mark's jump scare videos by flinching, looking frightened, or making frightened sounds, it's quite likely Tofu's sees Markiplier is involved every time... and blames Mark. Seeing his keeper get startled, Tofu doesn't understand it's a fun video or that humans enjoy being jumpscared (honestly I don't think I could explain it to him either) so he's learning from his human that Markiplier is a scary threat.
And from Tofu's point of view? He's right! Markiplier is a regular threat that not only (probably) scared his human, but regularly appears to stare him down and even went after him in his own home! And when his keeper scolds him? It's likely the same misunderstanding that dogs have when their owners yell at them to be quiet- they think the human has joined in! Clearly his keeper is joining him in being upset at Mark!
So in Tofu's mind? Mark is a diabolical threat to his family's safety that he must defend them against, and they are united with their keeper in their efforts to drive away that scary scary guy. You are very brave Tofu, and we are all very proud of you.
I'm sorry guys I know no one is going to want to hear this but I just got resuscitated after being dead for 5 minutes and it turns out hazbin hotel is true
Why do people treat near death visions and hallucinations as anything other than identical to dreaming?
I know some people take even dreams seriously, but it concerns me when I think about how people believe near-death or short-death experiences are somehow different or more true??
honestly an incredibly disrespectful and tasteless comment to make on my post about my very real experience of dying and going to hazbin hotel
i need to show you all something that made me crylaugh last night. just fucking look at them.
It's fine they just went a little nuts with the character creation face sliders
Male and Female animated characters of the same species
we should bring back she/her as the generic pronoun
im not joking btw im talking about how it used to be pretty common for communist writers to use she/her to refer to a generic worker/person/etc as a #feminist thing. it's more common to use gender-neutral language now but the problem is people are still constantly assuming that the default person is male, even when non-gendered language is used. she/her at least has the effect on the reader of like, giving them a stern look and saying "remember women exist". anyway i want us to bring this back
and before anyone gets silly, no it's not misgendering people who don't use she/her, unless you believe all the cis male writers who did/do this also believe that Everyone On Earth Is A Woman. it's a political writing choice

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 used to work for a trade book reviewer where I got payed to review peopleâs books, and one of the rules of that review company is one that I think is just super useful to media analysis as a whole, and that is, we were told never to critique media for what it didnât do but only for what it did.
So, for instance, I couldnât say âthis book didnât give its characters strong agency or goalsâ. I instead had to say, âthe characters in this book acted in ways that often felt misaligned with their characterization as if they were being pulled by the plot.â
I think this is really important because a lot of âcritiquesâ people give, if subverted to address what the book does instead of what it doesnât do, actually read pretty nonsensical. For instance, ânone of the characters were uniqueâ becomes âall of the characters read like other characters that exist in other mediaâ, which like⌠okay? Thatâs not really a critique. Itâs just how fiction works. Or ânone of the characters were likeableâ becomes âall of the characters, at some point or another, did things that I found disagreeable or annoyingâ which is literally how every book works?
It also keeps you from holding a book to a standard it never sought to meet. âThe world building in this book simply wasnât complex enoughâ becomes âThe world building in this book was very simpleâ, which, yes, good, that can actually be a good thing. Many books aspire to this. Itâs not actually a negative critique. Or âThe stakes werenât very high and the climax didnât really offer any major plot twists or turnsâ becomes âThe stakes were low and and the ending was quite predictableâ, which, if this is a cute romcom is exactly what Iâm looking for.
Not to mention, I think this really helps to deconstruct a lot of the biases we carry into fiction. Characters not having strong agency isnât inherently bad. Characters who react to their surroundings can make a good story, so saying âthe characters didnât have enough agencyâ is kind of weak, but when you flip it to say âthe characters acted misaligned from their characterizationâ we can now see that the *real* problem here isnât that they lacked agency but that this lack of agency is inconsistent with the type of character that they are. a character this strong-willed *should* have more agency even if a weak-willed character might not.
So itâs just a really simple way of framing the way I critique books that I think has really helped to show the difference between âthis book is badâ and âthis book didnât meet my personal preferencesâ, but also, as someone talking about books, I think it helps give other people a clearer idea of what the book actually looks like so they can decide for themselves if itâs worth their time.
I think that we as a society should get more comfortable with the idea that sometimes our friends will be attracted to us and sometimes we will be attracted to our friends and nothing needs to come of that.
You don't have to date. You don't have to stop being friends. You can just keep hanging out. Self control and respect exists.
And sometimes you will date your friend and figure out that your dynamic worked better when you were friends. And then you can go back to being friends. It's really quite simple. Mature and cool, even.
Even requited attraction doesn't need to be acted upon. Two people can be mutually attracted to each other and still decide not to date or not to change the dynamic of their friendship. People who are dating can mutually decide it worked better as a friendship, even if the attraction persists.
Feelings are just feelings. Not all feelings need to be realized as actions. It's very mature and cool to still treat people like people even after learning about their feelings, whatever they are.
i have too much joie de vivre for this
iâm so serious when i say excessive fear of being annoying/creepy/taking up peopleâs energy etc holds us back. it seems like itâs just little things but they add up. over the past month iâve ordered food and drinks almost exclusively by asking âdo you have a favorite?â and i know if i said that on twitter or wherever ppl would dogpile me for demanding emotional labor of servers or w/e but every single person iâve asked has seemed genuinely psyched to answer! i donât ask if itâs busy obvi, and use a phrasing that gives them the easy out of âi donât have oneââ but no one has taken it! the girl at the cafe confessed to me with something like conspiracy in her voice how everybody raves about the gluten free chocolate chip cookies and sure, theyâre great, but the delicious, fluffy homemade waffles are RIGHT THERE. the barbera the bartender recommended was actually kind of awful but it broke the ice and we ended up talking for like 45 minutes. the bodega guy declared that he usually makes himself a burger but tonight was âa breakfast sandwich nightâ and tbh he was totally right. it WAS a breakfast sandwich night
thank you tumblr user @saw5. tumblr user saw 5 gets it
Yakov Khomich
From the series "Girl in the blue dress", 2024
Oil on canvas.

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
Genuinely I love helping my friends so much. One of my buds called me and asked for a ride and was apologizing so profusely bc it was so last minute and they said they could pay me back and all that and I just got to be like "no worries I got u covered :D". Being able to just erase stress like that makes me the happiest person in the world
Hey so as the economy continues to get worse in the next few years, gambling companies are going to go extra hardcore predatory as people become more desperate. Yes, even more than they already are. You have to promise me right now you're not going to fall for it. No gambling, okay?
This is going to be especially bad with prediction markets and sports gambling, and it's already really fucking bad. But it also goes for loot boxes, blind box collectables, trading card games, and ESPECIALLY gacha games.
THE HOUSE ALWAYS WINS
GAMBLING IS NEVER PROFITABLE
RESIST THE URGE
#i cannot overstate they will make the horse girls gayer to get your money#im sorry thats just literally what it is#japan knows about yuri money
âmitski is so mentally ill!!â âis mitski okay?â shut uppppp sheâs literally a genius at storytelling and her art is always an expression of the narrative she is trying to share. nothingâs about to happen to me is from the perspective of a woman trapped in a house haunted by memories feeling like sheâs going crazy as she succumbs to her loneliness. thatâs why these songs are so devastating. #stopshoehorningmitski2026
important thing I learn as I grow up:
as a general rule, socioeconomic conflict doesn't come from people not communicating well enough or misunderstanding each other, it comes from conflicting interests over real resources. generally wars are not fought for ideology but for land, water, oil, etc. however, ideology does often form around these things, and of course miscommunication can exacerbate these issues, which can often give the false impression that wars are being fought "over nothing" or are purely ideological, rather than about the resource distribution a given ideology represents
similarly, politics are not primarily conducted based off abstract principles or emotions, they're conducted based off a series of personal incentives, which then generalize to class incentives. people struggle for what they think will help them and against what they think will hurt them, they don't reliably or predictably fight for abstract principles. this is important to know if you want to fight for change because your job is to illustrate how issues are effecting someone and how the issue can be resolved through action. this is contrary to what a lot of people seem to do, which is plead for others to be emotionally invested or hold "empathy", without establishing why that helps them. would people having empathy help your cause? maybe, probably even. but its simply not how political struggle occurs and it's not a strategy you can reliably implement
About Weapons (2025)
Spoilers:
Uh yeah Zach, that really, really comes through.

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 keep seeing the take that Weapons is about a school shooting and having just seen it last night, I donât get that vibe at all. Like, to me, the themes of children being an oppressed class - the narcissism of the older generation not viewing children as living, thinking, feeling human beings but as either props for them to use when theyâre fighting a pointless battle or as tools to enrich themselves somehow - and how that hurts everyone in a community in the long term is far more prevalent. The children are taken from their homes, in full view of their parentsâ security cameras, and still no one was alerted. Rather than come together as a community and try to work together to find their children, the parents seem to isolate, to the point where the mother Archer approaches doesnât seem to recognize him. The angry parents, Archer especially, all focus their rage on Justine even though the evidence against her is incredibly flimsy, simply because she is one of the only factors that ties them together and she is an easy target - sheâs not a parent, she canât TRULY care about the children, not like their FAMILIES do. Meanwhile, Archer didnât realize until it was far, far too late that his emotional distance from Matthew was turning the kid into a horrible little shit. None of the parents or even the police ever gave even a thought to Alex - the OTHER thing that ties all the missing children together - who suffered for months IN HIS OWN HOME. Justine has to point out that the paths the children took as they left didnât intersect at the radio tower, but at the Lilly home, because the thought never even crossed Archerâs mind. The danger was never the outside threat of the school, it was in a single family home on a quiet suburban street. But because Alex is a child, and not their child, the other parents pay exactly zero attention to him in the grand scheme of things, even though it should have been obvious to multiple people that something was seriously WRONG in Alexâs life. And this isnât even bringing Gladys into things, when she herself is basically the personification of an abusive and/or neglectful home life. The police, the other parents, the school - they failed Alex miserably because they didnât view him as a person, but as window dressing for their own grief.
It's so crazy how "Don't feed the trolls" was like the Motto of the internet & in forum culture of the 00s and early 10s and now you log onto a certain website and it's just an endless sea of people pouring gruel into the troll trough day in day out and no one seems to realize or care that their internet experience being a constant deluge of misery and bad faith discussion might in fact be their own fault