Latest Posts by enbylvania65000 - Page 7
A flyby of Earth from the International Space Station.
A topographical map of the UK built out of a LEGO in a vintage style. If you’d like this to become a real LEGO set, then add your support here.
The “Necromancy is evil“ we see in most fantasy worlds stems from a christian view of having to honor the body after death in a certain way to ensure the soul’s safety in the afterlife. And while I encourage you to explore societies that don’t see necromancy as evil, I also encourage you to explore societies that see necromancy as evil for different reasons.
Drow might believe that after death, your body belongs to Lolth and must be fed to spiders. Reanimating a body means stealing from Lolth and must therefore be punished.
A Zoroastrian inspired society might believe that with death, evil starts infesting the body, so dead bodies must be kept away from the community, and reanimating them keeps them in the community and is therefore bad.
Time for your daily dose of snail puppies
snuppies
???
Inspired by: Hours of Saint-Omer, France ca. 1320
BL, Add 36684, fol. 84v
Original image from: @discardingimages
Context: they were in a bar that can give you any liquid in the world
My friend: I take a bottle, not looking at the label and drink it.
Me: okay, roll a d100 for the drink
*rolls a 10*
Me, with the evilest smile: that’s f*cking vinegar, mate.
If you look state by state you’ll see that both parties are guilty of gerrymandering.
Also an electoral college where each state’s vote is proportional is better than the Maine/Nebraska system, which is in turn better than how most states are just winner take all for the whole vote. And just abolishing the electoral college is even better than all of those options.
2020 presidential election if all states divided votes by congressional district like Maine & Nebraska.
Hebrew should be coloured blue here
Etymology for chess in European languages
Party Split
We’re already a decent large group, but due to over arching plot, three players recent brought back their old characters from a previous campaign for a storyline. Bringing us to nine players.
DM: “Okay, so we have a few ideas on what to do. What first?”
Paladin: “I have some contacts coming to meet me, so I think I have to do my down time here.”
Sorcerer: “We need to got to Halrua and Waterdeep. I’m the only one who can teleport, so guess I’m doing those.”
DM: “Wait, are we finally splitting the party?”
Monk 1: “I also need to do a ritual to attune to the moonblade.”
Cleric: “I can teleport to Waterdeep, I just can’t get back.”
Sorcerer: “I can pick you up at the end of the week!”
Monk 2: “I wanna go to Waterdeep!”
DM: “…okay. Three way split. Not ideal, but–”
Monk 1: “I need to go to the forest for my ritual.”
DM: “Four way split?”
Artificer: “I need research in Candlekeep. We still have that invitation, right?”
DM: “Okay…five way split.”
Bard: “Six, technically. I’m on another plane.”
What does the arab in your carrd mean? Is it like afab and amab?
.. i’m palestinian
Considering making the predator birgs fellow sapients..
They live in smaller social units than birgs and are almost entirely carnivorous, subsisting mostly on their herds of semi-domesticated trunkhorses. They often bear pike-like tools for prodding and spearing animals.
Birgs maintain an uneasy coexistence with them, often striking trade deals or forming alliances against common foes. However, since the development of firearms, the Twowi have begun pushing the balance, slowly driving giant birgs from their ancestral ranges, and sparking increased conflict.
Many birg folklores designate them as cursed beings, transformed into ever-roaming ‘beastmen’ for consuming the flesh of trunkhorses (a taboo) or even another birg. To the giant birgs, their diminutive cousins are fearful, untrustworthy, and deceptively numerous.
Some misconceptions to clear up:
-Polyamory is not necessarily synonymous with “open relationship”. Poly relationships can be and often are closed relationships, involving only the members already present and not seeking out more people.
-Polyamory is not inherently abusive, disrespectful, cheating etc. People can lead happy, loving, fulfilling lives in poly relationships.
-Polyamorous people are not naturally “less committed” to their partners than monogamous people are. Polyamorous people can be and often are very committed to their partners, just as much as monogamous people are. Having multiple partners does not make a person less committed, the same way that you aren’t “less committed” to your friends for having multiple friends.
-Not all poly relationships are sexually oriented. Plenty of poly relationships do not include sex at all, in fact. That being said, there is nothing wrong with poly relationships that involve or are primarily about sex.
-Polyamorous people may have one-on-one sex with each other. Not everyone participates in all sex all the time.
-Polyamorous people/relationships aren’t inherently more “kinky” than monogamous people or relationships. Poly people can have quite vanilla sex lives. That being said, there’s nothing wrong with poly relationships that do involve kink.
-People in poly relationships may have different relationships to each other. Not everyone in a poly relationship feels the exact same way about everyone else. For example, A, B, and C may all be romantically attracted to each other, but only A and B are sexually attracted to each other, and so C is involved in the relationship in a romantic way but not a sexual one. Or perhaps A is sexually involved with B and C, but B and C are not sexual with each other. Or perhaps B and C are not romantically attracted to each other, either! There are different terms for these different sorts of relationships between members.
-Polyamory is not a solution to cheating, disrespect, abuse, etc. in monogamous relationships. If someone is disrespectful/abusive/a cheater while in a monogamous relationship, they’re still going to be abusive/disrespectful/a cheater in a poly relationship.
-If a monogamous partner tries to make excuses for cheating by saying “it’s polyamorous”, then that person is still a cheater, period. Polyamory is about informed consent for all parties involved, and cheating is not. If someone cheats on you and makes these sorts of excuses, you’re fully within your rights to dump their ass.
-Yes, it is possible to cheat on your partners in a polyamorous relationship, and it’s just as bad as cheating in a monogamous relationship.
-It’s not always easy to transition from a monogamous to a polyamorous relationship, even for people who know it’s exactly what they want. Polyamorous people can sometimes still feel jealous and insecure about their partners finding new people to love.
-Some polyamorous people consider their polyamory to be an important aspect of their identity. They may refer to themselves as polyamorous even when single, and they find themselves unable to be fulfilled in a monogamous relationship. They perceive their polyamory as similar to a sexual or romantic orientation. Other polyamorous people may consider their polyamory to be something that they choose to do, rather than a part of who they are.
-Polyamory is heavily, heavily stigmatized in many parts of the world. Polyamorous people deserve the support of other marginalized communities, such as the LGBTQ+ community, and activists would do well to work towards ending stigma and bigotry towards polyamory, and monogamous normativity.
Poly people, feel free to add on to this
Playing a college-themed modern fantasy campaign. All party members are members of ΔΝΔ and their major determines their class. The gang has to stop a dark wizard.
Evil Wizard: “Why do you insolent children fight?! What motivates you to continue on despite all I’ve done to stop you?!”
Paladin/Premed: “Caffeine and Justice!”
Bard/Performing Arts: “Fame and recognition!”
Barbarian/Kinesiology: “The rent’s due! Also a need for an outlet for my pent up stress and rage regardless of how healthy it may be!”
Evil Wizard: “…uh, wha-”
Wizard/Arcane Studies: “Borderline alcoholism and a crippling fear of failing out and not living up to the expectations set for you by others!”
Evil Wizard: “Oh dear Tiamat-!”
Monk/Philosophy: “I was promised a free sub coupon.”
“asexuality is just the lack of a sex drive, or a really low one” uuhhh no. really, no. that is incorrect, you have been lied to, i’m sorry.
asexuality is the lack of sexual attraction to anyone. sex drive is your horny meter. you can still be horny and not be sexually attracted to people! similarly you can be sexually attracted to people and not be horny!! amaze
If you can’t reblog this, unfollow me now.
Here is a comic I got the chance to create for the French Foundation For Medical Research. I feel incredibly honoured and proud to help the research.
Liens : Version française / Dons + en lire plus (FR)
a lot of you hate historians and archaeologists, and i think that’s a problem
look, i fully recognize that there are reasons to be skeptical of history and archaeology. i am very on board with criticizing academia as an oppressive institution, and the way that researchers take their bigotry and bias with them to their work. i also recognize that academia does a pretty bad job of communicating what it does to the public, and that’s a part of why people’s hostility to it is able to flourish.
but i am disturbed by the pervasive narrative in online leftist spaces that people who research the human past are ignorant and bigoted, and i think we need to do more to combat that narrative.
historians being homophobic has become a whole meme, and it feels like people are just using historians as a homophobia scapegoat, when in reality the humanities are overwhelmingly left-leaning. people also keep blaming historians for erasing the homoeroticism of fictional literary characters, which is just… not what historians do. homophobic biases and erasures in the interpretation of history over the past few hundred years are a very real thing that’s important to learn about, but scholars have radically shifted away from that approach in recent generations, and these memes are not helping people outside the field to understand history and reception. instead, a lot of people are coming away with the impression that…
(source… really? nobody?)
this thread gets bonus points for the comments claiming that modern historians argue about whether achilles was a top or a bottom using homophobic stereotypes, which i can only guess is a misunderstanding of the erastes/eromenos model (a relationship schema in classical greece; i think people have debated whether achilles and patroclus represent an early version of it). also a commenter claims that the movie troy invented the idea of achilles and patroclus being cousins when no, they were also cousins in lots of ancient sources.
there’s this post about roman dodecahedra (link includes explanation of why the original post is misleading).
there’s this thread about how some thin gold spirals from ancient denmark look exactly like materials used in gold embroidery to this day but archaeologists are stupid and don’t know that because they dont talk to embroiderers enough. in fact, the article says they were most likely used for decorating clothing, whether as a fringe, braided into hair, or embroidered. so the archaeologists in the article basically agree with the post, theyre just less certain about it, because an artifact looking similar to a modern device doesn’t necessarily mean they have identical uses.
this thread has a lot of people interpreting academic nuance as erasure. the museum label literally says that this kind of statue typically depicts a married couple, giving you the factual evidence so you can interpret it. it would be false to say “these two women are married” because there was no gay marriage in ancient egypt. (interpreting nuance as erasure or ignorance is a running theme here, and it points to a disconnect, a public ignorance of how history is studied, that we can very much remedy)
lots of other conspiracy theory-ish stuff about ancient egypt is common in social justice communities, which egyptologists on this site have done a good job of debunking
oh, and this kind of thing has been going around. the problem with it is that there are loads of marginalized academics who research things related to their own lives, and lived experience and rigorous research are different forms of expertise that are both valuable.
so why does this matter?
none of these are isolated incidents. for everything i’ve linked here, there are examples i havent linked. anti-intellectualism, especially against the humanities, is rampant lately across the political spectrum, and it’s very dangerous. it’s not the same as wanting to see and understand evidence for yourself, it’s not the same as criticizing institutions of academic research. it’s the assumption that scholars are out to get you and the perception that there is no knowledge to be gained from thorough study. that mindset is closely connected to the denial of (political, scientific, and yes historical) facts that we’ve been seeing all around us in recent years.
on a personal note, so many marginalized scholars are trying to survive the dumpster fire of academia because we care that much about making sure the stories that are too often unheard don’t get left out of history… and when that’s the entire focus of my life right now, it’s disheartening to see how many of my political allies are just going to assume the worst about the entire field
Still Friday This Counts
Saturday EGSNP during the day
Chicago Business District, 1898.
Cuba, 1680.
i enjoy playing this game on tumblr dot com called, “is that tag a keysmash, slang i dont know, or initials for some media i’m not familiar with?”
I wish someday the concept of someone being out of someone else’s romantic league is looked upon as another folly of the past
I said it in the notes on the last post but I’m gonna say it again.
I’m married to someone with severe memory problems. Automation of household appliances & systems helps him a lot and helps me a lot because it reduces the number of things I have to keep in my brain at all times. I love doors that lock themselves, being able to schedule dog food being delivered, a thermostat I can manipulate from wherever. Beyond my little bubble it should be noted that voice controlled appliances can be really good for people with mobility concerns. Appliances that can measure and talk and remember little tasks can be such a blessing for people.
I will never forgive Amazon and Google for taking technologies that could be really helpful and weaponizing them, and fuck everybody who acts like its some kind of conspiracy theory that those devices are spying on you. You absolutely should be distrustful of those devices but just make sure you’re getting angry at the right people.
If you consider yourself an ally of mentally ill people, here are some words, phrases, and general behaviours that make your mentally ill friends and family distrust the true nature/intentions of your allyship:
• Using the word "triggered" in place of "bothered", "upset", or "offended", without regard for the fact that "triggered" is an actual psychiatric term that refers to actual psychiatric triggers. (Also, 99% of the time when someone says something like "oh did I trigger you?", they're literally weaponizing the term in order to gaslight the person they're talking to, which just makes them a really shitty human being).
• laugh reacting, and/or sharing "funny" videos of human beings acting "fucked up" in public.
• conflating the meanings of "psychotic" and "psychopathic"/"psychosis" and "psychopathy" as if they're not two completely different words that just happen to sound similar.
• using the word "psychotic" or "psycho" to describe someone who just happens to be an aggressively shitty person. Actually, to be honest, you should probably stay away from calling shitty people anything that denotes mental illness, like, "crazy" (unless you're mentally ill and reclaiming the word for yourself)... I don't personally have an issue with people who use the word "crazy" to describe erratic behaviour, but a lot of us psychiatrically unwell folks do take issue with it.
• Something a lot of our society has a hard time wrapping their heads around is the idea that people can behave badly and with "evil" intent while being perfectly mentally healthy. Assuming or suggesting anytime an "evil" person makes headlines, that they must be "sick" to be able to do something so terrible is not only highly ableist but that assumption (that only mentally ill people can be evil, or dangerous, or violent) literally leads to the deaths of innocently suffering mentally ill people every single day.
Anyway. This is just a rant, really. Other mentally ill and/or neurodiverse people are welcome to add to the list. Neurotypicals and mentally healthy people can repost or reblog, but keep your opinions and questions to yourself (Google it if you need to), so as not to speak over others who are actually personally affected by this shit. Thanks.
*asking about the ranger’s familiar*
“What breed of danger noodle is Muffins?”
on inattentive traits of adhd
tl;dr at the bottom
so today i was at the dentist and they saw that i take adhd meds. he said something like “your case must not be as severe as some peoples. my son has adhd and he is always bouncing off the walls. but i can just sit here and have a normal conversation with you.”
there is so SO much stigma involved with adhd and it drives me insane. i’m so sick of the “10-year-old boy who can’t sit still” stereotype. this is definitely a way that adhd is presented, and of course they’re struggles are very valid. but neurotypicals only seeing adhd through that lense is so harmful. first of all, adhd is NOT just a “kids disorder”. seriously with this one? every article you find is “my child has adhd how to fix?” or “does my child have adhd?” as if only children struggle with adhd. as if it will just magically disappear. i’m so freaking sick of it. next, it’s the lack of understand of the inattentive side of adhd. this most likely comes from many of the symptoms being more difficult for the untrained eye to pick up on. inattentive adhd isn’t “less severe” then hyperactive adhd or “easier to handle”. it’s just different! as someone who is primarily inattentive, people just seem to constantly underestimate the effect that it has on our lives. they don’t see that we spend hours and hours on a project, all they see is that we turned it in late. they don’t see that we have to actively focus on focusing, all they see is us not paying attention. we have to work longer and harder than our nt piers (i’m not saying we have to work harder than nt at everything, just many tasks that a nt would find easy and fast we don’t because of the way our brain works!), but since people can’t see that, they see us as lazy. “pay attention” “try harder” “look at the board” “are you listening” “look at me when i’m speaking to you” “it’s only a few problems”. these are things i’ve been hearing since i was in kindergarden. this goes for any neurodiverse person: you aren’t “weak” for using your accommodations. they are there to help you, to even out the playing field. i use all of my extra time every time i take a test. is it kind of annoying? yeah. but at the end of the day, it drastically helps me. school and our society in general can be very ableist, and just because you’re struggling with something that neurotypicals aren’t, doesn’t mean that you are “less capable” or “more stupid” than neurotypicals. be kind to yourself and don’t compare yourself harshly to a neurotypical who may be able to do what you can in a much shorter period of time. that’s not fair, because you have an extra barrier to work with. if you struggle with these things and feel unseen, i see you, and there are many others going through the same thing.
if you have primarily inattentive adhd, or inattentive traits in your adhd, or adhd at all, you are such a badass!
!! of course everyone with adhd is valid and a badass! and primarily hyperactive people are amazing and have some of these struggles and some different ones that i don’t fully understand i just wanted to address some things about the inattentive side. i also know everyone’s adhd is different, i don’t speak from everyone whos primarily inattentive and they won’t relate to everything i say!
*this is based off of my experience and research but i’m not saying everything here is a fact, i just want to start a discussion.*
i realize that i just wrote an extremely long post about adhd, so here’s the very crucial tl;dr:
inattentive adhd is so valid and isn’t “less severe” then more hyperactive forms of adhd.
just because people can’t always see your problems right away, that doesn’t mean they aren’t valid.
you aren’t weak for using accommodations!
just because somethings takes longer for you than a nt doesn’t mean you are bad at it, or that you are stupid.
Cockatoo socializing with veterinary staff.