sex gifs

DELTARUNE TOMORROW

in a prestigious lecture hall with cherrywood walls a professor presents this tweet to their class. the students pass it around, each taking their chance to hold the tweet, to feel its weight in their hands. some students use their microscopes to study the tweet closely, others auscultate it with stethoscopes. once each student has had the opportunity to inspect it, the professor asks if there are any questions. the first several questions are the expected requests for clarification-- examples of chumpfuckery, inquiries as to the role of B*rnie in the production cycle of fuckcrustables, etc. the class falls silent again until a student in the back raises a hand and says "had the day not been a cromulent fuckcrustable, would tommy still needy drinky?" the professor's smile is wry yet impressed: this line of inquiry does not occur to every student. the professor says: "tell me what you think." the student ponders for a second, acutely aware that everyone in the room is watching them. "well," they finally say, "i've had days that were fuckcrustables before, some of them cromulent, and ive never needy drinky. wanty, sure, but not needy." the professor prompts them to keep going. "my theory is that... either tommy is lying or... maybe fuckcrustability doesnt actually correlate with drinky requisites?" so what does, another student asks. "i believe the key variables are the ex-wife and the tenant from hell. they generate the needy in question." the professor presses: "how can you be sure that tommy would not needy drinky otherwise?" the student replies, "because we are not talking about chumpfuckery or fuckcrustability in the abstract, we're talking about a confluence of variables producing an intersection of chumpfuckery, fuckcrustability, and cromulence that is greater than the sum of its parts. anyone would needy drinky in those circumstances, and im willing to wager that we could prove it mathematically using the drinky formula." a brief silence ensues before the classroom erupts into applause. that student goes on to graduate at the top of their class and become a leading figure in the field of tweet exegesis. the professor? that was tommy. and the student? that was You.

therapist: no

(the 4th one is Bumpus wanting dinner, friends can back me up on this)

Abstragedy sex scene my absolute beloved.

im gonna miss these girls

[30 seconds later in the group chat] OMGGGGG if we were pigeons we would absolutely make a nest together #ournest

This sux00rz…

But I need y’all to understand that if someone doesn’t give you their government name in a queer space, it’s not because they’re “mysterious,” and you do not have permission to take it upon yourself to figure out their “real identity” and go digging for them online like a private investigator. First, that’s creepy and a violation of privacy and reasonable boundaries. Second, some of us keep our private and professional lives very separate because we need to keep food on the fucking table and a roof over our heads, and our private life could jeopardize that.

See— that’s part of the issue. Y’all assume someone is in the closet because they hate themselves or lack self-identity. Some of us know exactly who we are, but need to prioritize financial stability or else our entire life gets exponentially harder immediately.

There is a misnomer that “the closet” inherently means “doesn’t know they’re queer” and not “isn’t out widely and publicly.” “Outness” is often a patchwork.