Latest Posts by wiwan-the-farmer - Page 4

Sometimes I think about sentient plants. Not ambulatory sentient plants, but plants that still grow instead of moving except they can control their growth

If you want to be over there you have to grow in that direction and put some roots down and once you're there you'll still be here too.

Plants that could build henges if they wanted to, but they'd have to grow around the stones to shift them and then grow in the direction they wanted to move the stones. Architects forever wound around the things they build, inextricable from their own art.

Or perhaps they die back eventually, all things die, and you can tell the really old henges, the really old monoliths and sculptures, because no one is part of them any longer.

drew over something i wrote for a class and liked :] sorry the cars are lowkey ugly, its because I fucking hate cars and cant be bothered to learn what they look like beyond ominous hunks of metal

This weekend I was told a story which, although I’m kind of ashamed to admit it, because holy shit is it ever obvious, is kind of blowing my mind.

A friend of a friend won a free consultation with Clinton Kelly of What Not To Wear, and she was very excited, because she has a plus-size body, and wanted some tips on how to make the most of her wardrobe in a fashion culture which deliberately puts her body at a disadvantage.

Her first question for him was this: how do celebrities make a plain white t-shirt and a pair of weekend jeans look chic?  She always assumed it was because so many celebrities have, by nature or by design, very slender frames, and because they can afford very expensive clothing.  But when she watched What Not To Wear, she noticed that women of all sizes ended up in cute clothes that really fit their bodies and looked great.  She had tried to apply some guidelines from the show into her own wardrobe, but with only mixed success.  So - what gives?

His answer was that everything you will ever see on a celebrity’s body, including their outfits when they’re out and about and they just get caught by a paparazzo, has been tailored, and the same goes for everything on What Not To Wear.  Jeans, blazers, dresses - everything right down to plain t-shirts and camisoles.  He pointed out that historically, up until the last few generations, the vast majority of people either made their own clothing or had their clothing made by tailors and seamstresses.  You had your clothing made to accommodate the measurements of your individual body, and then you moved the fuck on.  Nothing on the show or in People magazine is off the rack and unaltered.  He said that what they do is ignore the actual size numbers on the tags, find something that fits an individual’s widest place, and then have it completely altered to fit.  That’s how celebrities have jeans that magically fit them all over, and the rest of us chumps can’t ever find a pair that doesn’t gape here or ride up or slouch down or have about four yards of extra fabric here and there.

I knew that having dresses and blazers altered was probably something they were doing, but to me, having alterations done generally means having my jeans hemmed and then simply living with the fact that I will always be adjusting my clothing while I’m wearing it because I have curves from here to ya-ya, some things don’t fit right, and the world is just unfair that way.  I didn’t think that having everything tailored was something that people did. 

It’s so obvious, I can’t believe I didn’t know this.  But no one ever told me.  I was told about bikini season and dieting and targeting your “problem areas” and avoiding horizontal stripes.  No one told me that Jennifer Aniston is out there wearing a bigger size of Ralph Lauren t-shirt and having it altered to fit her.

I sat there after I was told this story, and I really thought about how hard I have worked not to care about the number or the letter on the tag of my clothes, how hard I have tried to just love my body the way it is, and where I’ve succeeded and failed.  I thought about all the times I’ve stood in a fitting room and stared up at the lights and bit my lip so hard it bled, just to keep myself from crying about how nothing fits the way it’s supposed to.  No one told me that it wasn’t supposed to.  I guess I just didn’t know.  I was too busy thinking that I was the one that didn’t fit.

I thought about that, and about all the other girls and women out there whose proportions are “wrong,” who can’t find a good pair of work trousers, who can’t fill a sweater, who feel excluded and freakish and sad and frustrated because they have to go up a size, when really the size doesn’t mean anything and it never, ever did, and this is just another bullshit thing thrown in your path to make you feel shitty about yourself.

I thought about all of that, and then I thought that in elementary school, there should be a class for girls where they sit you down and tell you this stuff before you waste years of your life feeling like someone put you together wrong.

So, I have to take that and sit with it for a while.  But in the meantime, I thought perhaps I should post this, because maybe my friend, her friend, and I are the only clueless people who did not realise this, but maybe we’re not.  Maybe some of you have tried to embrace the arbitrary size you are, but still couldn’t find a cute pair of jeans, and didn’t know why.

Diagram of the emotions during the average linux install

One thing about the Jackson films that bothers me deeply is that they are uncritically upheld as being full of "positive masculinity." Excuse me? This is the series that has Faramir ordering his men to beat Gollum, Aragorn cutting off the Mouth's head, & Gandalf beating up Denethor on multiple occasions (& kicking him into the pyre!). Sam's meanness toward Gollum, while understandable, is never questioned as it is in the book. Frodo is delusional to pity Gollum. Killing is fun, & mercy is silly.

Belatedly, I do agree. I get that the Anglophone media landscape can feel so saturated by absurdly reductive representations of masculinity that what the films do inherit from Tolkien in terms of emotional expression, friendship etc can feel revolutionary. But the films make a lot of minor and major adjustments to transform the story's visions of masculinity to something more conventional and particularly more violent in a way that is often endorsed by the narrative, or at least framed as an understandable if unfortunate exigency of war.

I once pointed out that Aragorn killing the Mouth of Sauron, an ambassador—however distasteful—is something that essentially operates on the worst kind of superhero logic, a sort of good vs evil righteousness-justifies-the-means thing. It's really glaring when based on a book where the character closest to the author is like "it's one thing, however regrettable, to fight to the death to defend ourselves and our people, but morally, evil deeds beyond self-defense cannot be justified by a righteous cause, not even lying to an orc."

Tolkien's version of the Mouth is an evil Númenórean sorcerer who, while he cannot really contend with Aragorn in a battle of wills, is nevertheless a person of the same kind and general capabilities who chose to serve Sauron. The way that the films use design to literally dehumanize the Mouth, to wholly distance him from the heroes he's literally akin to, and justify straight-up killing him although he poses no personal threat, because he's ugly and evil and (evilly) taunting them so they're mad and it's cool—yeah. It's not really that far removed from Gandalf clobbering Denethor being framed as a bit comedic and a bit cathartic, and seems part of a pervasive ethos of the films that seems to have completely fallen out of discussion of them.

I think we especially see this with the handling of not just my main faves, but Frodo, who really suffers in this more conventionally masculine framework. I often felt like the films want the real protagonists to be Aragorn and (to an extent) Sam, and Frodo feels a bit like dead weight from fairly early on. Adorable dead weight, but still, Tolkien's Frodo especially feels like a challenge to this kind of narrative ethos that the films are just not really up to handling.

It's not that everything about masculinity in the films is Terrible Actually, but I do think there are some unfortunate patterns like the ones you mention. And I'm constantly being recommended videos and posts about Aragorn (or others, but mostly Aragorn) as this unproblematic ideal of masculinity where I'm just ... yeah, no. He is interesting to me, including in the context of masculinity specifically, but I absolutely cannot buy the ideal positive masculinity thing.

I see a lot of people throw around the term fascist on this website, but I’ve never seen a definition for it, so I’m going to provide one.

The definition of fascism, if you look it up in a dictionary, should sound something like this:

a populist political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and race above the individual, that is associated with an autocratic government

Source: Merriam-Webster

This definition of fascism notably includes both Nazism and Classical Fascism (Italian Fascism) but leaves out other Fascist movements, namely Brazilian Integralism and Falangism.

So to really understand Fascism, you must first understand the “arms” of what makes up a fascist government or movement.

The arms that I was taught are as follows:

1. Corporatism - the belief that class conflict is unnecessary and the various social classes must cooperate and do their job. Please note that it is used in other contexts, and Fascism usually adds on the caveat that the classes cooperate with the good of the state

2. Militarism - Fascist movement traditionally merge state & military, which goes with corporatism to militarize society into strict and rigid social hierarchies. This also has the added effect of making Fascist nations more belligerent but also more unstable, as a fascist military when overstepping its duties often contradicts official government policy (for an example, look up the Marco Polo bridge incident)

3. Hatred of intellectualism - fascist movements dislike intellectualism, as freedom of thought can contradict what they believe to be the one truth. This is an important time to tell you that Fascism is a reactionary movement. Fascists do not like change, and dream of an imagined past ideal society.

4. Violent rhetoric against communism - Fascist movements arose in Europe as a result of the ascendancy of the USSR. Many prominent fascists used the fear of communism to cement their power and initiate purges. Fascists dislike communism because communism advocates for abolition of class structure and social equality, neither of which fit with the nationalist & hierarchical view of Fascists.

5. Ultra-nationalism & supremacy of the state - these two go hand in hand, as Fascists believe their nation to be above all else, superior and unbeatable in every way to every other country in the world. The state is the supreme power in fascist nations, and compliance is not expected as much demanded from all citizens. This often ties into racist views of fascists, who believe their race, similar to their nation, to be superior to all else. It is important to note that some fascist movements were not as extreme in the race department, as Integralism advocated for people of all races co-existing, so long as they were subservient to the states will, and Falangism believed that all Hispanic peoples (Spaniards, non-Brazilian South Americans, Latinos, Mexicans, and Philipinos) were all part of the super race, and should interbreed to create superhumans.

6. One leader - fascist movements have one person who is viewed as supreme & infallible, who wields autocratic authority over every aspect of the state and is treated as though they are the nation in many cases.

7. Feeling of national humiliation - fascist movements often espouse that their country has been slighted or humiliated by their allies or rivals in the past, and that the only way to make up for this stain on national honor is to expel those who humiliated the country (often ethnic minorities) and create a homogeneous and pure society

8. Mass media & propaganda - Fascism uses false statements and misinformation as propaganda to cement their authority and make their influence complete.

So with all of that in mind here are some prominent fascist governments both in history and modern day:

1. Italian fascism, aka classical fascism was started by Benito Mussolini and was the offical ideology of Italy until the end of WWII. Corporatism was the biggest tenant of this branch, along with a strong feeling of national betrayal by the allies in WWI.

2. Nazism, a movement that existed after WWI was taken up by Austrian politician Adolf Hitler, who led Germany until his death in 1945. Nazism called for racial purity, and used anti-Semitic & slavophobic rhetoric, all of which eventually led to the invasion of Poland (a Slavic country with a large Jewish population) and the start of WWII

3. Francoism / Falangism were competing Spanish ultranationalist ideologies following the conclusion of the Spanish civil war. Dictators Franz Franco won out and his ideology would rule Spain until the 1970s. The linguistic discrimination used by Francoism laid the groundwork for the modern Catalan & Basque independence movements

4. The Japanese military ruled Japan in a military dictatorship during WWII, and used fascist rhetoric and tactics, coupled with Japanese society being already arranged in a way to facilitate this, and supreme loyalty to the Emperor. The movement died out after WWII and the US occupation of Japan, as the Japanese military was formally disbanded and downsized immensely

5. Yes by my definition, Trumpism is a fascist movement. Please note that Trump is not a Nazi, he is a fascist and more specifically a Trumpist.

6. There were many smaller and less significant fascist countries during WWII and after, but I don’t know enough about none of them to say definitively if they were / are

Find the difference

I love it when Game changer screenshots look like fever dreams

It will all be okay

i wish there was an easier way to tell the difference between an "if it sucks hit da bricks" situation and a "sometimes being an adult means doing things that you dont wanna" situation

There's this sort of anthropomorphizing that inherently happens in language that really gets me sometimes. I'm still not over the terminology of "gravity assist," the technique where we launch satellites into the orbit of other planets so that we can build momentum via the astounding and literally astronomical strength of their gravitational forces, to "slingshot" them into the direction we need with a speed that we could never, ever, ever create ourselves. I mean, some of these slingshots easily get probes hurtling through space at tens of thousands of miles per hour. Wikipedia has a handy diagram of the Voyager 1 satellite doing such a thing.

"Gravity assist." "Slingshot." Of course, on a very basic and objective level, yes, we are taking advantage of forces generated by outside objects to specifically help in our goals. We're getting help from objects in the same way a river can power a mill. And of course we call it a "slingshot," because the motion is very similar (mentally at least; I can't be sure about the exact physics).

Plus, especially compared to the other sciences, the terminology for astrophysics is like, really straightforward. "Black hole?" Damn yeah it sure is. "Big bang?" It sure was. "Galactic cluster?" Buddy you're never gonna guess what this is. I think it's an effect of the fact that language is generally developed for life on earth and all the strange variances that happen on its surface, that applying it to something as alien and vast as space, general terms tend to suffice very well in a lot more places than, like... idk, botany.

But, like. "Gravity assist." I still can't get the notion out of my head that such language implies us receiving active help from our celestial neighbors. They come to our aid. We are working together. We are assisted. Jupiter and the other planets saw our little messengers coming from its pale blue molecular cousin, and we set up the physics just right, so that they could help us send them out to far stranger places than this, to tell us all about what they find out there.

We are assisted.

And there is no better way to illustrate my feelings on the matter than to just show you guys one of my favorite paintings, this 1973 NASA art by Rick Guidice to show the Pioneer probe doing this exact thing:

"... You, sent out beyond your recall, go to the limits of your longing. Embody me. ..."

Gravity assist.

legitimately my first feminist awakening as a ten year old child was realizing that girls were expected to respect “boy stuff” but boys were never expected to respect “girl stuff”

The Steven Universe fandom might be “cringe” and “bad” but imagine a fandom so bad that a bunch of fandom members had ran a scheme to say “if you pay us money, your blorbo will know you’re valid” and the fandom permanently split over a 95 paragraph callout post of these people.

if you ever find yourself thinking “wow I scraped the bottom of the barrel with my energy with that and came out okay!” that’s the devil talking. you did not come out okay. you borrowed energy from the future. you will repay it if you don’t rest and replenish the borrowed energy first.

okay im giving you to the count of -3 to restore the proper flow of time

guy who does unboxing videos but he only talks about the boxes

absolutely wild to me that I am leaning on the services of a state I am not subject to because my state, perhaps the most powerful institution in the world, refuses to protect me.

People are way too mean to Jake Sisko about his outfits :(( his fuckass outfits are one of the best parts of the whole show. Seeing non starfleet federation citizens. Seeing futuristic fashion. Having fun with colours and patterns. Seeing his fashion sense change from a child to an adult. He has more fashion sense than any of the muted militarised "something you could find in abercrombie and fitch" ass outfits of modern trek shows. Where is your zest for life, where is your idealism? Only Quark has more drip.

Hearing them get so excited over the whale fall is so fun I love hearing people who are passionate about their work

found a dude who does VR cruisin and boozin and im IN LOVE

The fact that Fountain is pissing off trads over a 100 years later is so fucking funny

This paints such a beautiful picture

There are a lot of irish stories about how the world used to be fantastical and almost cartoonish in scale (in the time of christ) but now (the 9th-15th century) the only magic we have is the love of god

I find it so deeply fascinating that there are medieval and possibly even ancient texts (I can't remember specifics rn but I definitely saw one from early medieval Europe recently) that are like "oh if only I lived in an earlier age when there was literal magic in the world"

I feel like nowadays people project that back ONTO the middle ages, but even back then they were like "there used to be magic and now it's gone"

its magic turtles all the way down etc etc

From the Wikipedia page on loons

thinking about this today